[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0423 (XMPP Compliance Suites 2020)

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Wed Nov 6 14:54:01 UTC 2019


On 6 Nov 2019, at 13:57, Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> wrote:
> 
> Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 13:45 Uhr schrieb Georg Lukas <georg at op-co.de>:
>> 
>> * Kevin Smith <kevin.smith at isode.com> [2019-11-06 12:24]:
>>> I think the addition of ’66 is well-intentioned, but jabber:x:oob <jabber:x:oob> is underspecified (it defines a syntax, but semantics are missing).
>> 
>> I agree, but nobody has written down the semantics yet, so there is no
>> place to link to. On the other hand, this approach seems to be so widely
>> used (despite me hating it), that it would be bad _not_ to tell
>> developers about it at all.
> 
> I think there is a broader discussion buried in there and that is do
> we want the Compliance Suite to be a guide for developers of the
> publicly federating XMPP network or for independent developers who
> just want to build their own solution based on XMPP.
> The former may find information regarding the current-but arguably not
> very ideal-solution useful. The later will find that utterly confusing
> and would prefer a 'clean' solution.

At the risk of derailing the conversation, I think there are more nuanced options than these. Some considerations only apply to the Internet. Some others apply whenever you want interop with off the shelf software, which might be on (for want of a better description) a ‘private Internet’ - e.g. those things you need to support because that’s what the state of the art is you will very possibly still need to support in such cases, even though it’s not on the Internet Proper. Yes, there are also the ‘completely closed’ cases where you only use XMPP for the re-use of existing things, rather than for the interop, and these have different considerations.

> Not that 0066 is just one example were this problem manifests itself.

I think 66 has problems beyond just this, though, as the appropriate way to use it just isn’t documented that I can see. I don’t think it can be in a compliance suite as-is.

/K


More information about the Standards mailing list