Typo XMPP --- On Fri, 28/1/11, Paul Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Paul Thomas <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ProcessOne appears to be forking > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, 28 January, 2011, 9:28 > I won't be hard to convince people > that XMTP is superior, but you won't do > that if they are unable to trial WAIB or it is too much > hassle. > > As far as I'm concerned HTTP is just an idea, it mightn't > even be implemented. > > If you think HTTP is a bad idea. Some are/were convinced > that SMTP is the natural protocol to use due to the now > infamous and false email analogy no doubt > > --- On Fri, 28/1/11, Alex North <[email protected]> > wrote: > > From: Alex North <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: ProcessOne appears to be forking > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, 28 January, 2011, 1:57 > > On 28 January 2011 09:04, James Purser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > MIght be an idea for someone to post a response on the > blog. Just to > > clarify > > a couple of items > > > > > Please don't post on behalf of the project, though of > course feel free to > express personal opinions. > > > > James > > > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Torben Weis <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > How ridiculous. > > > > > > Torben > > > > > > 2011/1/27 James Purser <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.process-one.net/en/blogs/article/xwave_a_tribute_to_google_wave_team/ > > > > > > > > So it appears that processOne is setting > themselves up as an > > alternative > > > > reference implementation based on the fact > that they don't like the > > work > > > > being done on the http version of the > protocol. > > > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > --------------------------- > > > Prof. Torben Weis > > > Universitaet Duisburg-Essen > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > >
