> On Jan 8, 2015, at 5:37 AM, Edwin Mons <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 08/01/15 14:18, Kurt Zeilenga wrote: >>> On Jan 7, 2015, at 9:27 AM, Ralph Meijer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 2015-01-07 16:15, Adrien wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 01/07/2015 03:42 PM, Edwin Mons wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> XEP-0060 lists both delete-items and retract-items for the same feature, >>>>> <retract/>. delete-items was added in the last revision, but it looks >>>>> like an error to me. I think 7.2 should be revised, and one of the two >>>>> features (likely delete-items) should be removed. >>>> yes you're right. At least that's what I have been told ("delete-items >>>> is the surplus one") when I asked. >>> I forget why it was added in the last version of this XEP, but it surely >>> wasn't missing as mentioned in the changelog, as we had 'retract-items' >>> as a feature for a long time. Reading the text around it, I feel it is >>> confusing, too. I'd rather go with talking about 'retracting items' and >>> 'deleting nodes' thoughout, and not talk about 'deleting items'. >>> >>> I think that many (all?) clients ignore this feature for discovery >>> altogether, so what about making 'delete-items' a thing that servers >>> SHOULD also advertise along with 'retract-items', but have clients >>> depend on 'retract-items' exclusively? >> Personally, I rather not add cruft like this. Has any server ever >> advertised this? Has any client ever relied on this? And, if it’s only >> SHOULD, no client can rely on it… Better, IMO, to just require one >> <feature/> to be advertised per feature. >> > > Eh, I've seen delete-items advertised in the wild, because M-Link > advertises it.
Yeah but for how long? My view is that while it might be nice continue advertising delete-items for clients which tried to adhere to XEP 60 as it’s written, adding a SHOULD here turns what is intended to reduce interop issues into a long term interop issue. Better, IMO, to leave it out of the spec. Server implementors will likely continue to advertise delete-items for some reasonable period of time without the SHOULD…. and that enough to give client implementors enough time (years) to move to proper feature name. But, over all, not all that big of deal. Nothing I feel like I need to fall on sword for. — Kurt
