Niklas Gustavsson wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]> > wrote: >> But you are right, RFC3920 which you cite seems more relaxed with >> respect to parsing the XML superset. >> One might argue now that RFC3920 is normative, while the -bis drafts are >> not (yet). But I think that the drafts better reflect todays state of >> XMPP and support more robust (and more simple, maintainable etc.) >> parsers: Fail-fast is good for those parts of the parser which otherwise >> would be rarely executed and thus would be more prone to security holes. > > /me makes a mental note to check the drafts before asking :-) > > I agree we should follow the draft spec in this case, primarily > because I think it makes more sense to signal an error to the client, > rather than just ignore.
I recommend to consult the drafts in the first place - and put aside the RFCs. :-) Bernd
