[Standards] Call for Experience: XEP-0122: Data Forms Validation
flo at geekplace.eu
Wed Mar 28 13:28:27 UTC 2018
On 28.03.2018 13:37, Kevin Smith wrote:
>> On 14 Mar 2018, at 17:29, Jonas Wielicki (XSF Editor) <jonas at wielicki.name> wrote:
>> The XEP Editor would like to Call for Experience with XEP-0122 before
>> presenting it to the Council for advancing it to Final status.
>> 2. Have developers experienced any problems with the protocol as
>> defined in XEP-0122? If so, please describe the problems and, if
>> possible, suggested solutions.
> I think 4.5 might be up for question.
>> 3. Is the text of XEP-0122 clear and unambiguous? Are more examples
>> needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST) appropriate?
>> Have developers found the text confusing at all? Please describe any
>> suggestions you have for improving the text.
> The SHOULD NOT on ‘x:’ types seems unnecessarily heavy, especially as fallback is specified in 4.1. The ‘shall’ specify basic seems inconsistent with saying that it’s option. Only ‘should’ match the data type for basic seems odd, especially as it’s almost immediately followed with a must.
I have a hard time determining the places in the XEP you are possibly
referring to. Could you pleaes give us some pointers?
> The various points that extensions are prohibited (must be empty) seems inconsistent with the usual ‘extend anywhere’ XMPPishness.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 618 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Standards