Jiří Zárevúcký wrote: > You didn't understand me. I'm just talking about examples being the > worst/most difficult to implement way imaginable. If developers really > do implement XEPs the example way, I'm frightened by the way servers > would implement this.
Excuse me, I really misunderstood you. My point is that development "by example" is evil. Examples never show general rule, that's ultimate limitation of any example. Developers should know that. Well, it's possible to add one more example with usual full-roster response and ver="HASH-OF-ROSTER", and replace `ver's in iterm-pushes with some pseudo-random strictly increasing sequence - that way will illustrate implementation guidelines a bit better. Anyway, I really doubt that content of `ver' attribute in examples matters that much. IMHO, any content is good enough. -- WBRBW, Leonid Evdokimov
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
