[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0423 (XMPP Compliance Suites 2020)
goffi at goffi.org
Tue Nov 5 21:55:02 UTC 2019
I'm really busy these days and couldn't do an extensive review, but here
is my feedback:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol
> stack or to clarify an existing protocol?
Definitely, there is a high demand for this kind of list from users, and
on the dev side it's really useful for newcomers to have a starting
point and to know where to look at.
> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction
> and requirements?
It's really chat focused, and I would like to see other categories,
notably a "social" one. I would put there XEP-0277 as the bare minimum,
and RSM for PubSub + MAM for Pubsub for advanced clients.
Also I have the feeling that the XEP numbers support is not enough, as a
XEP can be only partially supported (for instance, support for XEP-0060
is really different from one software to an other), so a more
fine-grained indicator could be useful. On the other hand, it may
over-complicate the compliance suit, so I'm just throwing the idea.
I wonder also if it would make sense to announce a compliance support in
disco, so a client could check a server compliance without having to
check all XEPs namespaces individually.
Why Jingle SOCKS5 Bytestreams Transport Method (XEP-0260) is missing
from the list while XEP-0261 is there?
> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not,
> why not?
For this specific XEP there is no notion of implementation, but I'm
using it to have an idea of what I need to implement yes.
> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?
> 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?
the specification is clear.
As a side note, it would be useful to have the notes showed in hover
tooltips in the rendered XEP, that would avoid to go down and up just to
I hope this will be useful
More information about the Standards