2017-12-04 10:00 GMT+01:00 Florian Schmaus <[email protected]>: > On 04.12.2017 09:53, Daniel Gultsch wrote: >> I was considering to just move it up by one level. Validation may or >> may not be an issue but I figured some libraries won't have a >> getExtension or getChildren method on the error class if they don't >> expect the class to have children. >> Are there any other examples of XEPs 'extending' the error element? > > It is perfectly fine where it is. See RFC 6120 ยง 8.3.2. and/or search for > > [OPTIONAL application-specific condition element]
Yes you are correct of course. In fact there is another example of the same XEP doing this just a few lines above. cheers Daniel P.S.: Maybe the misunderstanding with Evgeny comes from the fact that <retry/> is not exactly a 'condition' but an instructing. And something as general as <retry/> could probably be generalized for all errors of type wait. None the less this is valid XMPP. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
