[jdev] In-Band RPC and SOAP discovery
Hey all, What are the options here? One potentially elegant solution would be (for XMPP-RPC): C: S: And for SOAP: C: S: And for getting the wsdl: C: S: Yes/no/good/bad/ugly/scary? I am implementing this stuff so I need some feedback before I make a home-grown protocol. Jonathan
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something > like the following: The creation of XEP-240 was definitely done with MicroFormats in mind. > > > > > > JonathanDickinson > > Jabber ID: href="xmpp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the > format with a jid field. This would not be something for the MicroFormats groups to standardize. That being said... I'm not sure anyone has gone over and worked on that. I'm not sure whether it would be accepted or not as it would break compliance with the VCard spec that HCards parse to. ~ Anders > > > > Jonathan
[jdev] XEP-0240
You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something like the following: JonathanDickinson Jabber ID:[EMAIL PROTECTED] In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the format with a jid field. Jonathan
Re: [jdev] In-Band RPC and SOAP discovery
Jonathan Dickinson wrote: What are the options here? var='http://www.mycompany.org/xml-rpc/example.ConvertCurrency.php' /> Note that there may be things like var="http://jabber.org/protocol/something"/> there, too. It would be a bit confusing if we started adding URLs there. Maybe XEP 215 would be helpful? -- Maciek xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 07:56 -0700, anders conbere wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something > > like the following: > > The creation of XEP-240 was definitely done with MicroFormats in mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > JonathanDickinson > > > > Jabber ID: > href="xmpp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the > > format with a jid field. > > This would not be something for the MicroFormats groups to > standardize. That being said... I'm not sure anyone has gone over and > worked on that. I'm not sure whether it would be accepted or not as it > would break compliance with the VCard spec that HCards parse to. I don't we would need to do much to use XMPP URIs in some microformatty way, beyond what this XEP does. Just use anchors with rels, just like you do with HTTP links. -- Groetjes, ralphm
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Ralph Meijer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 07:56 -0700, anders conbere wrote: >> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something >> > like the following: >> >> The creation of XEP-240 was definitely done with MicroFormats in mind. >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > JonathanDickinson >> > >> > Jabber ID:> > href="xmpp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the >> > format with a jid field. >> >> This would not be something for the MicroFormats groups to >> standardize. That being said... I'm not sure anyone has gone over and >> worked on that. I'm not sure whether it would be accepted or not as it >> would break compliance with the VCard spec that HCards parse to. > > I don't we would need to do much to use XMPP URIs in some microformatty > way, beyond what this XEP does. Just use anchors with rels, just like > you do with HTTP links. Totally agreed, but I think the grandfather post was about using them in HCard, which extends beyond the more simple rel="me" and XFN cases. ~ Anders > > -- > Groetjes, > > ralphm > >
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
On 05/22/2008 9:11 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote: > On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 07:56 -0700, anders conbere wrote: >> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something >>> like the following: >> The creation of XEP-240 was definitely done with MicroFormats in mind. >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> JonathanDickinson >>> >>> Jabber ID:>> href="xmpp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the >>> format with a jid field. >> This would not be something for the MicroFormats groups to >> standardize. That being said... I'm not sure anyone has gone over and >> worked on that. I'm not sure whether it would be accepted or not as it >> would break compliance with the VCard spec that HCards parse to. > > I don't we would need to do much to use XMPP URIs in some microformatty > way, beyond what this XEP does. Just use anchors with rels, just like > you do with HTTP links. Right. For many XMPP URIs / identities, we can simply use the standard rel values. For others, we may want to define new rel values -- the one I'm most interested in right now is rel="discuss" for XMPP chatrooms but also useful for IRC channels, email discussion lists, web forums, voice and video conferences, etc. (any venue where you can have a discussion with multiple participants). I have an Internet-Draft half-written about that on my machine here somewhere... Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [jdev] In-Band RPC and SOAP discovery
On 05/22/2008 7:25 AM, Jonathan Dickinson wrote: > Hey all, > > What are the options here? > > One potentially elegant solution would be (for XMPP-RPC): > > C: > from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/jrpc-client' > to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/jrpc-server' > id='disco1'> > > > > S: > to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/jrpc-client' > from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/jrpc-server' > id='disco1'> > > > > > var='http://www.mycompany.org/xml-rpc/example.ConvertCurrency.php' /> What exactly does that identify? Is that a *feature* or a *service*? If it's a service, it's better to identify it via disco#items or even XEP-0215 as Maciek notes, because the service is external to the XMPP network. >targetNamespace='http://www.myserver.org/soap/someservice' > xmlns:wsdl='http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/' /> Or: Six of one, half a dozen of the other. :) I'm not a huge WSDL fan, but what you've described will work, I think. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML > something like the following: > > > > JonathanDickinson > > Jabber ID:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the > format with a jid field. > One small nit-pick: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Norman Rasmussen - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
On 05/15/2008 9:18 AM, Norman Rasmussen wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Sander Devrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> What about a list of social networks which we predict (or know for >> sure) will adopt XMPP in the future? That may prevent some useless >> work in the future and it gives people a nice indication that XMPP is >> the future (I miss the Jabber Journals...). >> > > FYI: There's a existing MySpaceIM transport codebase that I've coded, it > should be GPL'ed at the begining of August. Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list: http://www.xmpp.org/registrar/disco-categories.html#gateway (HT: Sander Devrieze) /psa smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
Remove steve rosewarne director product management [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Dickinson Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 7:39 AM To: Jabber/XMPP software development list Subject: [jdev] XEP-0240 You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something like the following: JonathanDickinson Jabber ID:[EMAIL PROTECTED] In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the format with a jid field. Jonathan
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing: simple sametime ocs And hell: xmpp Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) Daniel On 5/22/08 1:20 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 05/15/2008 9:18 AM, Norman Rasmussen wrote: >> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Sander Devrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> What about a list of social networks which we predict (or know for >>> sure) will adopt XMPP in the future? That may prevent some useless >>> work in the future and it gives people a nice indication that XMPP is >>> the future (I miss the Jabber Journals...). >>> >> >> FYI: There's a existing MySpaceIM transport codebase that I've coded, it >> should be GPL'ed at the begining of August. > > Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list: > > http://www.xmpp.org/registrar/disco-categories.html#gateway > > (HT: Sander Devrieze) > > /psa > >
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list: > FYI: http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info";> http://jabber.org/protocol/commands"; /> http://jabber.org/protocol/chatstates"; /> -- - Norman Rasmussen - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Daniel Henninger wrote: Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing: simple sametime ocs And hell: xmpp Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) Then make it x-xmpp. Or x-mpp ;D -- Maciek
Re: [jdev] XEP-0240
unsubscribe steve rosewarne director product management [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of anders conbere Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 7:56 AM To: Jabber/XMPP software development list Subject: Re: [jdev] XEP-0240 On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Jonathan Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You guys should also look at micro-formats. This would allow HTML something > like the following: The creation of XEP-240 was definitely done with MicroFormats in mind. > > > > > > JonathanDickinson > > Jabber ID: href="xmpp://[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > In addition to the stuff. All you would need to do is to extend the > format with a jid field. This would not be something for the MicroFormats groups to standardize. That being said... I'm not sure anyone has gone over and worked on that. I'm not sure whether it would be accepted or not as it would break compliance with the VCard spec that HCards parse to. ~ Anders > > > > Jonathan
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing: > simple > sametime > ocs > > And hell: > xmpp > > Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I > don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Because some people want it. You've always complained about it. I've always have people request it. At the end of the day, if people want it, I'd rather help them out than argue with you about it. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:03 PM, "Sander Devrieze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing: > simple > sametime > ocs > > And hell: > xmpp > > Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I > don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
On 05/22/2008 11:50 AM, Norman Rasmussen wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list: > > Duly noted. :) /psa smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sander Devrieze wrote: >> >> 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> xmpp >>> >>> Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I >>> don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) >> >> Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can >> confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? > > That's for poor clients like Coccinella that doesn't support multiple > accounts ;) No, that's not what I mean. The Openfire Gateway thing includes a separate transport instance for Google Talk, besides XMPP. So people see in the list "XMPP Transport" *and* "Google Talk Transport". I don't see why it is useful to have this kind of duplication...but maybe there is a reason for that? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
On 05/22/2008 11:40 AM, Daniel Henninger wrote: > Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing: > simple > sametime > ocs Perhaps lcs as well? I think that LCS and OCS use different flavors of MS-SIMPLE. But I'll check on that > And hell: > xmpp Ick. But, yes, I suppose so. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Sander Devrieze wrote: 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: xmpp Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? That's for poor clients like Coccinella that doesn't support multiple accounts ;) -- Maciek
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, "Sander Devrieze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sander Devrieze wrote: >> >> 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> xmpp >>> >>> Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I >>> don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) >> >> Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can >> confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? > > That's for poor clients like Coccinella that doesn't support multiple > accounts ;) No, that's not what I mean. The Openfire Gateway thing includes a separate transport instance for Google Talk, besides XMPP. So people see in the list "XMPP Transport" *and* "Google Talk Transport". I don't see why it is useful to have this kind of duplication...but maybe there is a reason for that? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
I'm responded to that question many times in the Ignite Realtime forums. To date I've never had one confused end user. Either way, don't use it if you don't like it. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, "Sander Devrieze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sander Devrieze wrote: >> >> 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> xmpp >>> >>> Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I >>> don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) >> >> Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can >> confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? > > That's for poor clients like Coccinella that doesn't support multiple > accounts ;) No, that's not what I mean. The Openfire Gateway thing includes a separate transport instance for Google Talk, besides XMPP. So people see in the list "XMPP Transport" *and* "Google Talk Transport". I don't see why it is useful to have this kind of duplication...but maybe there is a reason for that? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Huh. Good job Entourage. Sent that one before I finished typing. Longer one came afterwards. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:27 PM, "Daniel Henninger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, "Sander Devrieze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sander Devrieze wrote: >> >> 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> xmpp >>> >>> Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I >>> don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =) >> >> Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can >> confuse people, or am I wrong and are there good reasons to have it? > > That's for poor clients like Coccinella that doesn't support multiple > accounts ;) No, that's not what I mean. The Openfire Gateway thing includes a separate transport instance for Google Talk, besides XMPP. So people see in the list "XMPP Transport" *and* "Google Talk Transport". I don't see why it is useful to have this kind of duplication...but maybe there is a reason for that? -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums. Do you have links? Remember this is a thread that is intended to post URLs ;-) -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
Laugh I don't have time to sit here and run through the forums looking for links. Daniel On 5/22/08 2:40 PM, "Sander Devrieze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums. Do you have links? Remember this is a thread that is intended to post URLs ;-) -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'm responded to that question many times in the Ignite Realtime forums. To > date I've never had one confused end user. Either way, don't use it if you > don't like it. It makes people think Google Talk is no XMPP. That's what I mean with confusion. -- Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
[jdev] help us fix jabberd2 and get $500
I'm offering a $500 bounty (and a Chesspark t-shirt) to anyone who can fix the memory leak(s) in the session manager component of jabberd2. You can find more info here: http://metajack.wordpress.com/2008/05/22/want-500-help-us-fix-jabberd2/ jack.
