On Montag, 21. Mai 2018 18:06:30 CEST Tedd Sterr wrote:
> My point is that it's difficult to tell what's mandatory and what's
> optional, and so it's still going to require combing through all eight
> documents first to find out what's necessary and second to decide what's
> desirable.
I’ve heard
org> On Behalf Of Tedd Sterr
Sent: 21 May 2018 17:07
To: XMPP Standards <standards@xmpp.org>
Subject: Re: [Standards] Taking a Machete to MIX
Fist impression: eight is a lot! (There's a lot of functionality to cover, I
know.)
I presume the intention of splitting up MIX is to make it ea
Fist impression: eight is a lot! (There's a lot of functionality to cover, I
know.)
I presume the intention of splitting up MIX is to make it easier to both
understand and implement, however, purely separating a large document into
multiple smaller ones doesn't immediately achieve this (it
Following the recent discussions about MIX, Kevin Smith and I worked out a
plan to split up MIX.
This is now eight XEPs. Here is the summary from the updated 369:
"MIX is specified as a family of XEPs that address the full set of
requirements. Only two of these XEPs are mandatory for
