Tue, 05 Dec 2017 10:31:36 +0100 Jonas Wielicki <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don’t think that’s ok. ejabberd would violate the expectation of > the user that either a type="result" or type="error" is returned, if > they simply filter out the "erroneous" stanza. Obviously ejabberd replies with a correct error message, currently it will send an error stanza with diagnostic text, e.g.: "Unknown tag <retry/> qualified by namespace 'urn:xmpp:http:upload:0'" > Also, I still don’t believe that intermediate servers should validate > content which doesn’t concern them. I disagree. The feature is useful for client developers for example, so they get validation errors when sending garbage and, thus, can fix the code easily. For example, some of our customers just add new elements within existing namespace (such as 'jabber:client'), and this will be easily rejected by the validator. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
