Hello Sachin, On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:30:58 +0530, Sachin Khandelwal <[email protected]> wrote:
> I feel it'll create inconsistency due to changes in section "7.1 and 7.2" . > As per section sec 4.5 the with attribute can be JID (not only full jid). so > due to this change, it'll not be possible retrieve the collections having with > attribute as bare JID. Not directly related to this particular change, but looks like you're right that section 4.5 is a bit strange: it describes ch...@with], but talks about "matching" - I believe it does not make sense in this context. 2Peter: does it make sense to remove "If the JID is of the form <[email protected]>, any resource matches; if the JID is of the form <domain.tld>, any node matches" paragraph from 4.5, as it describes 'with' attribute of 'chat' element, not 'with' attribute of any command, so there's no "matching" to talk about? This paragraph might be moved to 10.1 section, for example: probably it might be renamed from "Exact JID Matching" to "JID Matching" then and in 2.2.3.2, 7.1 and 7.3 all info about 'jid'/'with' meaning might be removed and the link to "JID Matching" might be just given instead (yes, I'm a real fan of DRY principle ;-) ) 7.2 will have slightly different wording (discussed below) and 2.2.3.2 (or 2.2.3?) additionally might mention that more specific JIDs settings override less specific ones. As for the inconsistency: yes, recent change might introduce some inconsistency, see below. > One solution I think of is to keep sec "7.1 Retrieving a List of Collections" > as it is and for sec. "7.2 Retrieving a Collection", remove the 'exactmatch' > attribute and the value of with attribute should always be exactly matched > by default. Yes, I believe 'exactmatch' in '7.2' was left just by the accident and I agree the wording should be slightly adjusted also. 2Peter: I would suggest the following further changes (that's basically what Sachin says, I believe, just slightly more expanded): 1. Remove 'In addition, the client MAY match an exact bare JID &BAREJID; by setting the boolean 'exactmatch' attribute to a value of "true" or "1" &BOOLEANNOTE; -- for details, refer to the <link url='#impl-exactmatch'>Exact JID Matching</link> section of this document.' paragraph from 7.2 2. Move "Note: Collections are retrieved only based on the full JID ..." from 7.1 to 7.2 (as it belongs there, not to the "retrieving a list of collections") and rephrase it like "Note: the <retrieve/> shall not possess the 'exactmatch' attribute, as exact JID matching (see the <link url='#impl-exactmatch'>Exact JID Matching</link> section of this document) is always implied for this command. This is done to prevent returning multiple collections from the <retrieve/> command", as current wording implies that only "full JIDs" might be specified, but in fact we should enforce not "full JIDs" but "exact matching". If you agree on changing 10.1 to become "JID Matching" instead of "Exact JID Matching" the link and wording around it would be slightly different in (2), but the idea is the same. 2Sachin: does it correspond to your suggestions? -- Good luck! Alexander
