On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Peter Saint-Andre<stpe...@stpeter.im> wrote: >> Could we just do a new urn:xmpp:roster namespace, expose your master roster >> via that namespace (also), and use that new namespace to talk to external >> entities? > Or we could use jabber:iq:roster as we always have in the past, with > urn:xmpp:roster for the share groups functionality.
I'm sure there were good reasons for both these suggestions - I can understand why if we upgrade the usage we can upgrade the namespace, but what is the motivation for suggesting two different namespaces for the same job? Best, /K
