Right, I started xmpp4js about a year ago because JSJaC didn't meet my needs at the time. The problems I had with it were how tightly coupled things were, and that it used string manipulation for packets rather than DOM. It seems that the author has done a lot to it since then and I think I remember seeing it using DOM, so I'd imagine they are about similar now. On the other hand, xmpp4js might be more immature; documentation is kind of sparse, it has only really be used with Openfire, and it might not follow the spec 100% even though it works. The only 'known' implementation using it right now is Soashable.
The alternative script syntax is implemented in the public trunk of xmpp4js, and is live on soashable.com. Harlan On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 9:37 PM, Adam Pisoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the info. I'm just checking out that section of the XEP now. > How do you think xmpp4js compares to JSJaC. I was under the impression > (wrongfully it seems) that xmpp4js was the older library and JSJaC was the > newer one. When you say you just implemented it in xmpp4js, do you mean in > the trunk or just locally? > > adam > >
