> I cannot emphasize enough that the examples are not normative. In fact, they often contain errors.
Agreed, but when other hints are missing, it's the best we got I guess. > The entity that generates an error stanza SHOULD include the > original XML sent so that the sender can inspect and, if > necessary, correct the XML before attempting to resend. Yeah, I read this as well as also makes the interpretation that we should include the complete stanza, but examples seems to contradict that. > What would be our motivation to change this behaviour? For one, Smack can not handle our current error stanzas as showed by the integration tests I've written for XMPP Ping (not yet committed since they do not currently pass). In these, when sending an error, Smack will not be able to locate the <error> element. One can probably argue that this is a bug in Smack, but given the examples in both the RFC and the XMPP Ping spec, I would lean on the problem being with us :-) /niklas
