Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-09-07 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 8/23/10 3:34 AM, Yann Leboulanger wrote: On 08/19/2010 12:14 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: On 8/17/10 6:15 AM, Yann Leboulanger wrote: On 08/17/2010 02:03 PM, Matthew Wild wrote: On 17 August 2010 12:52, Peter Saint-Andrestpe...@stpeter.im wrote: On 8/17/10 5:37 AM, Matthew Wild wrote:

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-09-07 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 8/23/10 1:26 AM, Marcus Lundblad wrote: ons 2010-08-18 klockan 20:58 -0600 skrev Peter Saint-Andre: IMHO the range/ element in XEP-0096 is underspecified (in fact all of XEP-0096 could use an update), but I think that a session-initiate message in Jingle file transfer could include the

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-23 Thread Marcus Lundblad
ons 2010-08-18 klockan 20:58 -0600 skrev Peter Saint-Andre: IMHO the range/ element in XEP-0096 is underspecified (in fact all of XEP-0096 could use an update), but I think that a session-initiate message in Jingle file transfer could include the range/ element. Perhaps some examples would

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-18 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 8/17/10 6:15 AM, Yann Leboulanger wrote: On 08/17/2010 02:03 PM, Matthew Wild wrote: On 17 August 2010 12:52, Peter Saint-Andrestpe...@stpeter.im wrote: On 8/17/10 5:37 AM, Matthew Wild wrote: Also I've had bad experience (as a user) with transfer resumption thus far... I think some

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-18 Thread Justin Karneges
On Wednesday 18 August 2010 15:14:59 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: On 8/17/10 6:15 AM, Yann Leboulanger wrote: On 08/17/2010 02:03 PM, Matthew Wild wrote: On 17 August 2010 12:52, Peter Saint-Andrestpe...@stpeter.im wrote: On 8/17/10 5:37 AM, Matthew Wild wrote: Also I've had bad experience

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-18 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
Part 1, about XEP-0234. See also feedback from Matthew Wild after the XMPP Council meeting the other day: http://xmpp.org:5290/muc_log/muc.xmpp.org/council/100816/#13:19:33 On 8/16/10 10:21 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: I'm forwarding this old message to the Standards list for further

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-17 Thread Matthew Wild
On 17 August 2010 05:21, Peter Saint-Andre stpe...@stpeter.im wrote: I'm forwarding this old message to the Standards list for further discussion. Expect follow-ups soon. /psa Original Message Subject: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261. Date: Fri, 28 May 2010

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-17 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 8/17/10 5:37 AM, Matthew Wild wrote: On 17 August 2010 05:21, Peter Saint-Andre stpe...@stpeter.im wrote: I'm forwarding this old message to the Standards list for further discussion. Expect follow-ups soon. /psa Original Message Subject: [TechReview] Review of

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-17 Thread Matthew Wild
On 17 August 2010 12:52, Peter Saint-Andre stpe...@stpeter.im wrote: On 8/17/10 5:37 AM, Matthew Wild wrote: Also I've had bad experience (as a user) with transfer resumption thus far... I think some clients just ignore the range, and send from 0, causing the range-supporting recipient to

[Standards] Fwd: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261.

2010-08-16 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
I'm forwarding this old message to the Standards list for further discussion. Expect follow-ups soon. /psa Original Message Subject: [TechReview] Review of XEP-0234, 0260 and 0261. Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 14:53:14 +0200 From: Steffen Larsen zoo...@gmail.com Reply-To: XSF