[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.

-------------- 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