On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Mark Rejhon <[email protected]> wrote: > If we fix the schema, would this force namespace to increment: > i.e. urn:xmpp:rtt:1 instead of urn:xmpp:rtt:0 > > My commentary: All developers have complied with the assumed latter schema, > since it was obvious from the rest of the spec. All existing XEP-0301 > implementations comply with the latter schema. Therefore, implementations > have correctly implied the correct usage. Thus, I don't think namespace > should need to increment. > > Comments?
If existing implementations already do this, I see no reason to bump the namespace. In fact, this would be counterproductive as it would basically just be requiring each client to advertise both :0 and :1 or break compatibility. Since the upgrade wouldn't break any compatibility, no namespace bump is necessary (IMO). Thanks for doing an annual review; I think this is a great idea, and if it's not documented as a requirement somewhere it should be! I've added this to my calendar so that I remember to do it in years to come :) Best, Sam -- Sam Whited pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3 https://blog.samwhited.com
