Firstly, I appologise for sluggish response. I ran into another
space-time continuum singularity...
Secondly, see inline.
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 3/14/09 4:28 AM, Helge Timenes wrote:
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 3/13/09 8:49 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0255.html
I notice that the suggested / allowable values of the 'type' attribute
are "cell", "wifi", "bluetooth", "wimax", "rfid", "ip", "other". I see
three ways to handle these:
1. Restrictive: lock down these values in the schema
2. Permissive: allow applications to include any value they choose
3. Extensible: set up a registry so that we don't need to update the
spec every time we add a new value while still providing guidance to
implementors
I lean toward #3.
That seems sensible, though i suspect the reference types will change
frequently while the XEP is young, but at some point settle down as the
spec catches up with all the possibilities out there (sure new ones will
be invented, but not at a pace that is hard to keep up with I'd guess)
If we have a registry, we don't need to update the spec all the time.
Perhaps it's not a big deal.
How would such a registry work? Are there examples of such from other XEPs?
I've defined all the registries so far since I'm the XMPP Registrar. :)
It's easy enough for me to add this to the spec.
Register at will :-)
BTW, did we not add the "ethernet" type yet?
I added the IP type, but not yet ethernet. Would that indeed be the
right type name? As I understood Joe it would be the MAC address of a
Network Interface Card (NIC), so maybe "ethernet" would be a bit vague?
Helge
