2018-03-07 20:17 GMT+01:00 Jonas Wielicki <jo...@wielicki.name>:
> The XEP Editor would like to Call for Experience with XEP-0048 before
> presenting it to the Council for advancing it to Final status.
>
>
> During the Call for Experience, please answer the following questions:
>
> 1. What software has XEP-0048 implemented? Please note that the
> protocol must be implemented in at least two separate codebases (at
> least one of which must be free or open-source software) in order to
> advance from Draft to Final.

Every implementation and basically just one implementation.

Bookmarks based on 0049 are widely implemented. Bookmarks based on the
recommended PEP are implemented in just one (two~ish) clients.

> 2. Have developers experienced any problems with the protocol as
> defined in XEP-0048? If so, please describe the problems and, if
> possible, suggested solutions.

The one and a half implementations based on PEP both messed up:
https://gultsch.de/converse_bookmarks.html

> 3. Is the text of XEP-0048 clear and unambiguous? Are more examples
> needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST) appropriate?
> Have developers found the text confusing at all? Please describe any
> suggestions you have for improving the text.

XEP-0048 seems clear enough to me. But 0223 isn’t clear and you can’t
implement 48 w/o 223. (See the link above)

> If you have any comments about advancing XEP-0048 from Draft to Final,
> please provide them by the close of business on 2018-03-21. After the
> Call for Experience, this XEP might undergo revisions to address
> feedback received, after which it will be presented to the XMPP
> Council for voting to a status of Final.

At this point I wouldn't recommend advancing this XEP.
XEP-0048 based on XEP-0049 has big problems with multi client
environments and long standing sessions. (Usually clients fetch
bookmarks once at connect. Long standing sessions then increase the
time bookmarks go w/o being refreshed)
It is unclear due to the lack of implementation that PEP sufficiently
solves the multi client problems (The problem on whether it is better
to put one bookmark in an item or multiple that was raised already in
this thread.)

It feels a bit sad that we aren't able to advance a XEP that is widely
deployed (in a way) but I think it is just too late. If we had this
discussion five years ago I would have happily advanced a version
based purely on 49. But right know it is stuck in a limbo between the
no longer suitable 49 and the unfinished 223.

cheers
Daniel
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to