Ok, plenty of agreements in this specific thread -- good... On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Gunnar Hellström < [email protected]> wrote:
> <GH2>This discussion is just about a discrepancy between 6.1.4, 4.1 and > 4.4. > 6.1.4 says " In addition, it is acceptable for the transmission interval > of <rtt/> to vary, either intentionally for optimizations, or due to > precision limitation." > 4.1 says "The <rtt/> element is transmitted at regular intervals " > 4.4 says "For the best balance between interoperability and usability, > the default transmission interval of <rtt/> elements for a > continuously-changing message SHOULD be approximately 0.7 second." > > It looks most consistent for the logic to just delete "either > intentionally for optimizations, or due" from 6.1.4. > I'll give this a re-reading (mind you -- it's a minor matter, compared to, say, merger of <e/> and <d/>) > <GH2>OK for inserting Business rules and moving most of 6 to it. > I'll assume that this is the way to go, unless somebody from XSF advises otherwise. [snip] > <GH2>OK, covered above. > [snip] > <GH2>The specification begins to be overspecified with what you can do if > you do not want to follow the main idea. You are right, you can do as the > second paragraph of 6.4.4 says, but it has risks that it occasionally > creates unfavorable user experience. I think you should leave to the > creative reader to create such odd usage combinations of the protocol > elements. > > So, I still propose to delete the second paragraph of 6.4.4. > Might be valid. I'll make a private consultation with that vendor, and see if there's any issue. Also, I'd like to hear from others at XSF, too. <GH2>And what is the conclusion then? I would not like to discourage from > use in MUC. > Simple: It's why it's not a good idea to quote predicted server load factors for XEP-0301, without a reference to a paper first. <GH2> I think it belongs to Business rules. > I am starting to agree, too. Any comments from others about moving MUC to a "Business Rules" section, or keeping it down there as an Implementation Note? [snip] > <GH2> Good > [snip]
