FYI
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kevin Smith Date: Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:18 AM Subject: Re: Minutes 2013-03-20 To: XMPP Council On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: > 6) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sensor-data.html > Accept as Experimental? > > No objections from Matt, Matt, Ralph. Kev and Tobias have a fortnight to > object. The iqs are bare JID instead of full JID. Why not use type='error' for error stanzas? Why not send iq responses after processing, instead of before? Should times use 82? I'm not entirely sure that I understand the translation stuff. Isn't this equivalent to using strings in e.g. English, and then having a translation map? I think multicast is probably misleading here as what it's likely to be doing is really a multi-singlcast type of thing. No objections to it going to Experimental, in any case. > > 7) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/exi.html > Accept as experimental > > Much discussion during the meeting - see the room logs. > > Main points of contention were whether attacks were possible by doing > schema exchange pre-auth and whether it fits the 138 model or should > be a new transport binding. > > Matt Wild didn't object, others have a fortnight to object. I'm going to not object at the moment to it going to Experimental, although I do still have reservations about it. I'd quite like to know how EXI in this case compares to zlib (It looks rather like zlib should cope pretty well with these data). /K
