[Standards] [Council] XMPP Council Agenda 2020-07-22

Florian Schmaus flo at geekplace.eu
Tue Jul 21 17:53:12 UTC 2020


On 7/21/20 5:33 PM, Jonas Schäfer wrote:

> 4) Items for voting
> 
> 4a) PR#971 vs. PR#972
> URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/971
> URL: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/972
> Summary: The first one is truly an (editorial) clarification (AFAICT), the 
> second one is a normative change to the presence of type fields in certain form 
> types.

Since I have created these two PRs, a little bit of background:

The question is, if 'result' forms *must* contain form-field type
information, or, if the types are optional. I was told that ejabberd and
Prosody send 'result' forms with types, whereas Openfire does not (at
least for extended service discovery results).

PR #971 changes the XEP to clarify that 'result' forms may be delivered
without type annotations. And PR #972 does the other alternative: it
explicitly states that 'result' forms *must* come with field types.

Those two are mutually exclusive.

- Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 618 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200721/2c3aa847/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list