[Standards] XEP-0390: use of separators which are valid (but discouraged) in XML 1.1 (as opposed to 1.0)

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Mon Mar 5 09:33:19 UTC 2018

On 05.03.2018 09:04, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> Dear list,
> Florian discovered that the ASCII separators we use, while invalid in XML 1.0 
> (upon which RFC 6120 bases), are only discouraged in XML 1.1. 
> I wonder whether we should be concerned about this. 

I wouldn't be worried, as I'd expect XMPP to stay XML 1.0 for a
foreseeable future. If you violate XML 1.0 and accept non well-formed
XML 1.0, then it is not really something extension protocols have to

On the other hand, if we have a robust and therefore better approach,
e.g. using NUL separators, it may be worth the namespace bump.

I am undecided and have no strong preference.

Nevertheless we should think about specifying restrictions (a string
profile) for the values used in xep390. See the related discussion in
the "What is the size limit of node and item ids in XEP-0060:
Publish-Subscribe?" thread. This would allow an upgrade path to XML 1.1
while xep390 could stay as is because the profile forbids the used
separator codepoints.

- Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 642 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20180305/92609c59/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list