Andreas Monitzer wrote: > Why use a non-existing protocol as an example, when you could use the > well-known discovery protocol for it?
Simple, I did not thought about that :) I had my future media server XEP in mind, but XEP-0030 can also serve as an example. All the item listings can be very long. > Section 3, Example 5: That's not EBNF, could you change it to the > correct syntax, so there is no room for interpretation? It is not? OK, I will fix it. It should have been EBNF :) > On a higher level, I think that's a great idea :) Could be hell for > some client implementations, though, due to the asynchronicity (you > have to buffer the parts of the stanza you already know, and collect > the rest before passing it to the upper layers). Yes, maybe restrict the usage to a stanza and not allow it inside a stanza by default. So a client MAY send any return from any XEP out of band, but only the whole result. If out of band is allowed somewehere deep inside a stanza it SHOULD be added to the XEP defining that namespace. > You should also add the regular section about discovering support for > this protocol. Yes, it is only a first draft. If people think that it is a good idea, I will add all this. Thanks for the feedback. Dirk -- I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my telephone. -- Bjarne Stroustrup
