On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 04:16:29 AM Sergey Dobrov wrote: > On 08/26/2011 01:08 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: > > On Thursday, August 25, 2011 07:27:16 AM Sergey Dobrov wrote: > >> On 08/25/2011 03:36 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: > >>> For example, my XEP-0303 proposes selecting ordering using special node > >>> name suffixing, such as "?order=-created" to indicate created time > >>> descending order. But this is just one way to go about it. > >> > >> I don't have enough time to dive into XEP-303 enough but I don't think > >> that this is a good idea to use "dynamic" pubsub nodes without separate > >> XEP for it. Again, I don't think that different ordering is really need > >> at this time. > > > > Maybe you don't need it, but I need it. :) The commenting protocol > > requires both created time ordering (for application display render) and > > modified time ordering (for tracking updates). But, I am open to > > discussing alternatives that don't involve dynamic node names. > > But where determined what is "dynamic" node? How servers can implement > it without specification?
By dynamic node, I just mean the node can accept parameters when fulfilling requests. I guess you could write some reusable code that marshals the parameters (i.e. popping them off the end of a node name). But, which parameters are possible and how the parameters shall be honored is node-specific, so there's not really much more generic code you can write. Justin
