Re: [Standards] A Short Note about "Tedd Sterr"

Thank you Tedd , for the excellent work you're doing recording the minutes and the voting. It's been a big help for me as well, as I'm sure for many others. And here I thought Tedd was your real name. 樂 Am 26. November 2019 01:18:31 MEZ schrieb Tedd Sterr : >I saw the title and started

Re: [Standards] A Short Note about "Tedd Sterr"

I saw the title and started wondering "oh no, what have I been accused of?" I'm glad what I do is useful and appreciated; I like to help make things happen, as I'm sure others do too, so I hope we can all continue doing that. I'm less sure that I should be singled out - others do much more, and

Re: [Standards] [Members] A Short Note about "Tedd Sterr"

On 2019/11/25, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > On Montag, 25. November 2019 10:45:37 CET Dave Cridland wrote: > > I can't begin to adequately explain how useful this is. The minutes Tedd > > sends out are highly engaging summaries of what happened in the meetings > > and I hope they're as useful to others

Re: [Standards] A Short Note about "Tedd Sterr"

On Montag, 25. November 2019 10:45:37 CET Dave Cridland wrote: > I can't begin to adequately explain how useful this is. The minutes Tedd > sends out are highly engaging summaries of what happened in the meetings > and I hope they're as useful to others as they are to me and the rest of > the

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Montag, 25. November 2019 14:27:46 CET Emmanuel Gil Peyrot wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 01:16:48PM +, Dave Cridland wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:26, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > > > On Sonntag, 24. November 2019 10:11:06 CET Emmanuel Gil Peyrot wrote: > > > > Hello standards@, > > >

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 14:32, Evgeny wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:25 PM, Dave Cridland > wrote: > > We put arbitrary namespaced data inside messages and other stanzas > > all the time to no ill effect. Why is putting it inside PEP data > > items so different? > > Because I like the

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On 25 Nov 2019, at 14:25, Dave Cridland wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 14:19, Evgeny > wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:17 PM, Dave Cridland > > wrote: > > If you're saying we shouldn't have arbitrary namespaced data in such > >

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:25 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: We put arbitrary namespaced data inside messages and other stanzas all the time to no ill effect. Why is putting it inside PEP data items so different? Because I like the approach used when designing ASN.1 schemas (see for example RFC

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 14:19, Evgeny wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:17 PM, Dave Cridland > wrote: > > If you're saying we shouldn't have arbitrary namespaced data in such > > places, I disagree. > > Yes, I see that we disagree. Dead end like always. OK, but I'm trying to understand why.

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:17 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: If you're saying we shouldn't have arbitrary namespaced data in such places, I disagree. Yes, I see that we disagree. Dead end like always. ___ Standards mailing list Info:

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 14:12, Evgeny wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 4:47 PM, Philipp Hörist > wrote: > > From a programming perspective I would argue that storing one element > > away is much less work than searching for all unknown child elements. > > +1. I also disagree with what Jonas and

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 4:47 PM, Philipp Hörist wrote: From a programming perspective I would argue that storing one element away is much less work than searching for all unknown child elements. +1. I also disagree with what Jonas and Dave said: we should not abuse extensibility by putting

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

> On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:26, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > >> The only thing I wonder is: Why an extra sub-element? This reminds me of >> the >> `X-` prefix which has since been deprecated. We *do* have namespacing in >> XML, >> let’s make use of that. Simply state that all unknown child elements of

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 01:16:48PM +, Dave Cridland wrote: > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:26, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > > > On Sonntag, 24. November 2019 10:11:06 CET Emmanuel Gil Peyrot wrote: > > > Hello standards@, > > > > > > One of the issues with 0048 bookmarks was that any extension to a >

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:26, Jonas Schäfer wrote: > On Sonntag, 24. November 2019 10:11:06 CET Emmanuel Gil Peyrot wrote: > > Hello standards@, > > > > One of the issues with 0048 bookmarks was that any extension to a > > bookmark was possibly removed by another client which didn’t know what >

Re: [Standards] Bookmarks 2 extensibility

On Sonntag, 24. November 2019 10:11:06 CET Emmanuel Gil Peyrot wrote: > Hello standards@, > > One of the issues with 0048 bookmarks was that any extension to a > bookmark was possibly removed by another client which didn’t know what > to do with it. > > I’d like to achieve something better for

[Standards] A Short Note about "Tedd Sterr"

Hi everyone, For the past couple of years the pseudonymous "Tedd Sterr" has been writing minutes, and more recently tracking voting status of the XMPP Council. We received minutes on the 21st of March 2018 from Tedd, and they've become a steady fixture ever since. Voting status emails came later