Hi all, not sure I am supposed to reply to this as author of the XEP, but here goes... I hope it will trigger more replies to the call.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:33 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor<[email protected]> wrote: > 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to > clarify an existing protocol? To me it is. It defines clearly the content of an <iq> with respect to the data type and allowed content. The specification describes how clients can query the allowed content with the service in a simple and well defined manner. I like this simplicity, making it easier to write 100% implementing libraries. > 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and > requirements? The XEP introduces an alternative data container with strong data typing (going beyond xs:string), which we are happily using in machine-to-machine settings, in our XMPP web services environment. Using XML Schema the data type is well defined, such that clients can even on the fly build Java models of that schema and use that to create a IO-Data message. > 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not? We are using Johannes Wagener's http://xws4j.sourceforge.net/ And I know if this client implementation by Tuomas: http://www.lobstermonster.org/examples/ws1.bmc.uu.se/ > 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? Data input is generally a source of failures of services, and IO-Data does not change that. However, the strong data typing makes it much easier to validate the input, though it depends on how strong the schema implements data types. This XEP does not introduce new security issues. > 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? I understand it :) So, I leave this to others to comment on. Egon -- Post-doc @ Uppsala University http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
