[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Simple JSON Messaging

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Wed Feb 19 00:33:10 UTC 2020


On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 23:09, Marvin W <xmpp at larma.de> wrote:

> The new XEP still uses the shortname "udt", has it in schema and also
> mentions UDT in the §2.2, without there being any description of what it
> means. I guess you just forgot to update those. This is likely to cause
> confusion if left like this (especially the one in §2.2).
>
>
I didn't change the filename and shortname deliberately, though I'm happy
to. §2.2 is indeed in error.


> My only main critique that remains is that I fear using JSON inside XML
> on wire can become normal the more we specify around it.
>
>
It is normal, outside this group. That train has left the station, and
there is little point in closing the stable door after the ship has sailed.


> we could just only go with something like
>
> > <payload xmlns="urn:xmpp:object-msg:0" datatype="urn:example:foo">
> >     <object xmlns="urn:example:xoml">
> >         <list name="a b">
> >             <object>
> >                 <number name="c">1</number>
> >             </object>
> >         </list>
> >         <string name="d">e</string>
> >         <null name="f" />
> >         <object name="g" />
> >     </object>
> > </payload>
>
>
There's actually an XML JSON-alike already specified, somewhere.

But honestly I think choosing to go such a route would be overkill. I
understand the sentiment, really I do, but the fact is people seem to look
for the simplest solution to getting JSON over the XMPP session, and I
think that's probably what we have here.

Dave.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200219/51400783/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list