[Jabber-IETF] internationalization/localization

Iain Shigeoka iain.shigeoka at messaginglogic.com
Wed Oct 16 10:57:58 CDT 2002

Sounds fair. Localization and internationalization tend to be fairly
inefficient anyhow so I was only weakly protesting the extra noise. :)
J2ME/mobile clients that pay by the byte xferred would be the
biggest issue and I think this modification sufficiently covers that.



On 10/15/02 5:01 PM, "Joe Hildebrand" <JHildebrand at jabber.com> wrote:

> Um.  No.  I don't think I want that part of my system to keep track of who
> I've sent packets to.  Memory footprint.
> I don't see any "redundant" packets here.  It's quite possible that two
> different messages that I send to you might be in different locales.
> I'm not sure what the perf benefits of not including the attribute are,
> unless you count the extra 14 bytes on each packet, and the very slight CPU
> overhead of extra parsing.
> How about we add one more point:
> 6) If a client did not send an xml:lang attribute on the stream:stream, the
> last-hop server that is about to deliver a packet to that client MAY strip
> off xml:lang attributes on packets that it delivers to that client.
> So, if you are a low-bandwidth client, don't send xml:lang, and you won't
> get any.  Just connect to a server that has its default locale set to the
> one you want, and everything works.  It's ok if servers send extra xml:lang
> attributes between one another, since those connections tend to be
> high-bandwidth.

More information about the xmppwg mailing list