-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/20/09 5:16 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> I noticed there's been some activity on XEP-0060, 

As I previously noted, I am sending all posts about this to the
[email protected] list. Once I have finished processing all of the bug
reports I've received over the past 6 months (I've now done so through
sometime in February), I will send out a message to both pubsub@ and
standards@ about the fixes.

> so here's a minor
> niggle to consider:
> 
> The second pargraph of Section 9 reads:
> 
> Note: Because the account owner's bare JID functions as a virtual pubsub
> service, it is OPTIONAL for the owner to include a 'to' address when
> sending publish requests and completing other publisher and owner use
> cases. That is, when the IM server receives a pubsub-related IQ stanza
> of type "get" or "set" from one of the account owner's resources, the
> server MUST consider the stanza to be addressed to the account owner's
> bare JID even if the IQ stanza does not include a 'to' address.

First of all, this "implicit to" functionality has been made more
explicit in rfc3920bis/rfc3921bis, and that is where it needs to be
defined. So I think it needs to be deleted here.

> I've a couple of problems with this.
> 
> 1) It's respecifying the base spec. Normative language about a
> particular issue needs to be only in one place, to avoid any possible
> confusion over which specification is normative on the issue.

Right.

> 2) It's confusing, as it refers to "a pubsub-related IQ stanzas of type
> [...]" whereas any C2S stanza, at all, with no to attribute has a
> default destination of the bare jid.
> 
> Can we replace this with something that sounds more advisory, such as:
> 
> Note: Because the account owner's bare jid is the default destination
> address, clients typically omit the "to" attribute on such stanzas; see
> RFC 3921.
> 
> What a lot of words I've written for something so small. :-)

But it's good to be clear on this kind of thing. Thanks.

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknsgiYACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzQxgCeMRBt5g5SoAPMhWMun2fuoLk+
5MwAoOE3D243SncfhMoK6OflDCJFDHOm
=CUjF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to