[Standards] OBSOLETED: XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM)
dave at cridland.net
Thu Mar 8 10:59:31 UTC 2018
On 8 March 2018 at 10:54, Manuel Rubio <manuel at altenwald.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I usually only read to understand and learn but sometimes I head up and
> freak out with some decision. I usually read RFC and when a new one is
> released it supersedes, deprecates or obsoletes another one. But, the status
> of that RFC usually is definitive. Obviously it's definitive until a better
> one is released (as Descartes always said there are nothing definitive only
> temporal until we can find a better solution/theory/explanation).
It's not an RFC it's a XEP, and the procedures are different.
If this were an RFC, we'd be designating it "Historical".
> In this case I can see you are putting "obsolete" to XEP-0071 and it's
> intended there are a new proposal better on the table... where? XEP-0071 has
> no explanation about why it was obsoleted only a vague description "Per a
> vote of the XMPP Council, advanced to Obsolete". I wanted to know "why".
Summarized in this thread and intensively discussed in Council and on this list.
> And more important, if the XEP-0071 is obsoleted because XEP-0393 is
> there... why XEP-0393 is experimental? I'm not pretty sure but looks like
> you are suggesting to use something experimental instead of something it was
> working for years. If XEP-0393 is the reason because XEP-0071 is obsoleted,
> I think it's fair enough to advance the state from experimental to something
> different for XEP-0393, IMO.
XEP-0071 is obsoleted on its own merits. The other XEPs merely show
there could be a viable alternative.
XEP-0393 will be advanced on its own merits later.
> Last thing, what's the usual flow for the states? I cannot find information
> here: https://xmpp.org/extensions/ ; there are only the possibility to
> filter based on those states but not information about what means each one
> or even how it could be advanced from one to another.
More information about the Standards