[Standards] XMPP over Websocket vs XEP-0198

2013-01-25 Thread Stefan Strigler 
Hi,

within Section 3.5[1] XMPP over Websocket states that the closing party MUST 
close the XMPP stream if it has been established. With hindsight of page 
transitions within legacy web apps this might not be wanted by the client as it 
might wish to resume the stream by use (abuse?) of XEP-0198 or some other 
technique. 

Now my questions are:

* Is there some other best practice known how to deal with page transitions 
other than XEP-0198?
* Would XEP-0198 be well suited for this scenario?
* Do we need/want to support this scenario after all within this Draft? If not, 
why?

Maybe this could be just one more topic on the summits agenda next week. I've 
seen there's already quite some demand discussing things regarding web related 
topics.

Regards, 

Steve

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moffitt-xmpp-over-websocket-01#section-3.5

Re: [Standards] XMPP over Websocket vs XEP-0198

2013-01-25 Thread Peter Saint-Andre 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 1/25/13 9:42 AM, Winfried Tilanus wrote:
 On 01/25/2013 05:15 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
 
 Peter,
 
 [1] 
 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moffitt-xmpp-over-websocket-01#section-3.5

 
 
 IMHO
 
 that spec needs quite a bit of work, still. New editors might be
  required to get it done. However, it appears that this document 
 will probably become an official work item of the XMPP WG at the 
 IETF (I sent proposed charter text to the chairs last night), so 
 discussion there might be appropriate at some point too.
 
 Do you have an overview of issues with that draft?

No, but I plan to review it in detail before the Summit. :)

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlECtnoACgkQNL8k5A2w/vxIKACgh5Hhf4sg0y5JmIzzUqPapCtZ
oxUAoIPbNuy1P6U0GXzPiRHpVtVONow/
=J9d+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-