On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, the goal is (one assumes) interoperability and functionality, so we > need both features and specifications, but the features need to be quite > specific. "MUC", for example, seems right, since a (mythical) client > supporting MIX won't interoperate with XEP-0045.
Yah, that makes sense. I've gone ahead and merged for now since this is still experimental and changing, but I'll figure out a better way to format it or just make MIX a footnote. I still feel compelled to use this as a chance to promote it, but since we don't have a "MIX with MUC bridge" spec yet, for interoperabilities sake I suppose it makes sense to not reference it here. —Sam -- Sam Whited pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3 _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
