Re: [Standards] XEP-0136 (Message Archiving)

Hello Peter, On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:46:18 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > That's a lot of changes. Can we allow the changes in 1.1 to settle for a > while before we make further edits? Are the modifications you propose > spec errata, protocol optimizations, niceties instead of necessities, > s

Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol

Hi Dave, On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:13 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: On the one hand, that allows you to build simple "What's the value of this variable?" things quite easily, but it also allows you to build arbitrary message processing things. Sorry to bombard you with lots of text to read, but Josh

Re: [Standards] XMPP-0060 meta data enhancement

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 9:01 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: > On Tue Sep 29 15:28:26 2009, Nathan Fritz wrote: >> On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> >>> On Tue Sep 29 12:31:39 2009, Mads Randstoft wrote: After some talks at the jabber dev MUC, it

Re: [Standards] Pubsub temporary subscriptions and access control

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/21/09 5:45 AM, Mads Randstoft wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I've been reading up on pubsub and have a question regarding >>> subscriptions. I'm looking for functionality that allows a user to >>> temporarily subscribe to a node, perhaps based on presence.

Re: [Standards] XSF Server Test Suite

This is the direction things are heading. The syntax is just something that we came up with at the last summit but I've exptended it. Perhaps is over complicated for the task. Perhaps these test scripts should be written in XML in order to avoid specialized parsers. Are there any decent C

Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol

Hello Dave, I wondered whether a better option might be to supply (within the VM) a standard library including a message-passing interface, so that you could simply send running jobs a query, and they'd get back to you (when convenient) with the responses. Both Josh and Jack Moffitt had m

Re: [Standards] XEP-0136 (Message Archiving)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 2:51 PM, Alexander Tsvyashchenko wrote: > Hello All, > > Here are, I'm afraid, some more suggested changes to XEP-136 ;-) Alexander, That's a lot of changes. Can we allow the changes in 1.1 to settle for a while before we make further edi

Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol

On Tue Sep 29 21:34:38 2009, Marko A. Rodriguez wrote: I have been interested in removing manage_bindings as of lately cause its too complicated to implement due to the requirement for threading a virtual machine. That is, a submit_job can be executing while, in parallel/concurrently, you

Re: [Standards] XEP-0136 (Message Archiving)

Hello All, Here are, I'm afraid, some more suggested changes to XEP-136 ;-) The patch to XEP is attached, however, it's only for example purposes - I'm nowhere near 100% sure these changes should go to spec in this form at all, and also it does not include all modifications discussed below. a) A

Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol

Hi, Also, will you expand on your "manage bindings" concept? I am not sure why this is treated as a special case, with full schemata support as well. To me the stanzas: http://linkedprocess.org/2009/06/Farm#"; vm_id="62F4E464"> and http://linkedprocess.org/2009/06/Farm#"; vm_

Re: [Standards] [Interop] XSF Server Test Suite

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Craig Kaes wrote: > > Ignorant question — can something like Expect deal with multiple responses > from a single input where the order of those responses does not matter?  That > drove us away from this approach in the past but maybe things have gotten > better

Re: [Standards] help pubsub filter

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/25/09 12:48 AM, Nathan Fritz wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Jason Eacott > wrote: > > hi All, > I found this post > http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2008-May/018810.html > a

Re: [Standards] help pubsub filter

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/24/09 9:37 PM, Jason Eacott wrote: > hi All, > I found this post > http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2008-May/018810.html > and I need exactly this functionality. I'm wondering if anything like > this actually progressed, I haven't real

Re: [Standards] XSF Server Test Suite

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 10:20 AM, Nathan Fritz wrote: > Peter, I notice the interop group is not on the discussions page. That's because it hasn't been active. I'll add it now. If folks are interested, please continue this discussion on the inte...@xmpp.org list,

Re: [Standards] XSF Server Test Suite

> > For the past 6 months, we've been discussing on creating a standardized > test suite as a tool for XMPP Server developers, and perhaps in the future > for further purposes. There was discussion of having a hosted solution that > can execute scripts from a list of > > --

Re: [Standards] XSF Server Test Suite

-Original Message- From: standards-boun...@xmpp.org [mailto:standards-boun...@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Fritz Sent: 09/29/2009 12:21 PM To: inte...@xmpp.org; XMPP Extension Discussion List Subject: [Standards] XSF Server Test Suite I'm double posting this to standards and interop,

Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol

-Original Message- From: standards-boun...@xmpp.org [mailto:standards-boun...@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Marko A. Rodriguez Sent: 09/28/2009 5:56 PM To: XMPP Standards Subject: Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Linked Process Protocol NOTE: Josh and I are reviewing Ad-Hoc commands as

[Standards] XSF Server Test Suite

I'm double posting this to standards and interop, but generally this is a conversation for interop that I thought you should all be aware of. Peter, I notice the interop group is not on the discussions page. For the past 6 months, we've been discussing on creating a standardized test suite as a t

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 10:07 AM, Paul Witty wrote: > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 9/29/09 5:15 AM, Pedro Melo wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: >>> As a bit of b

Re: [Standards] Is XEP-0049 superseded by XEP-0223?

On 29 Sep 2009, at 17:06, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: No, I'm not. But I think we need some experimentation with the pubsub approach before we definitively kill off private XML storage. OK, we will experiment then :-) -- petef

Re: [Standards] Is XEP-0049 superseded by XEP-0223?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 10:05 AM, Peter Ferne wrote: > On 29 Sep 2009, at 17:03, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> I won't be convinced that XEP-0223 truly supersedes XEP-0049 until I see >> people actively using it for the same use cases... > > > Are you aware of a

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

Peter Saint-Andre wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 5:15 AM, Pedro Melo wrote: Hi, On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: As a bit of background on what I'm trying to do, I'm implementing a SIP to XMPP/Jingle gateway. The gateway is connected to the

Re: [Standards] Is XEP-0049 superseded by XEP-0223?

On 29 Sep 2009, at 17:03, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: I won't be convinced that XEP-0223 truly supersedes XEP-0049 until I see people actively using it for the same use cases... Are you aware of any specific reasons why it hasn't gained traction, other than inertia? -- petef

Re: [Standards] Is XEP-0049 superseded by XEP-0223?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 9:05 AM, Peter Ferne wrote: > Apologies if this has been discussed before. I've just been looking at > using XEP-0048 Bookmarks and noticed that section 3 starts with: >> It is RECOMMENDED to use Publish-Subscribe [4] for data storage, >> sp

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/29/09 5:15 AM, Pedro Melo wrote: > Hi, > > On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: >> As a bit of background on what I'm trying to do, I'm implementing a >> SIP to XMPP/Jingle gateway. The gateway is connected to the XMPP >> server as a compo

[Standards] Is XEP-0049 superseded by XEP-0223?

Apologies if this has been discussed before. I've just been looking at using XEP-0048 Bookmarks and noticed that section 3 starts with: It is RECOMMENDED to use Publish-Subscribe [4] for data storage, specifically through the use of personal data nodes hosted at the user's virtual publish-sub

Re: [Standards] XMPP-0060 meta data enhancement

On Tue Sep 29 15:28:26 2009, Nathan Fritz wrote: On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: On Tue Sep 29 12:31:39 2009, Mads Randstoft wrote: After some talks at the jabber dev MUC, it seems there is a need to be able to add more data to a node and more data to an item than is cu

Re: [Standards] XMPP-0060 meta data enhancement

On Sep 29, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: On Tue Sep 29 12:31:39 2009, Mads Randstoft wrote: After some talks at the jabber dev MUC, it seems there is a need to be able to add more data to a node and more data to an item than is currently possible in a std. way. I see priority as a

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

On Sep 29, 2009, at 7:06 AM, Paul Witty wrote: Pedro Melo wrote: Hi, On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: As a bit of background on what I'm trying to do, I'm implementing a SIP to XMPP/Jingle gateway. The gateway is connected to the XMPP server as a component (e.g. sipgw.xmppserve

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

Pedro Melo wrote: Hi, On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: As a bit of background on what I'm trying to do, I'm implementing a SIP to XMPP/Jingle gateway. The gateway is connected to the XMPP server as a component (e.g. sipgw.xmppserver.com) and so the Jingle client can make a call to

Re: [Standards] XMPP-0060 meta data enhancement

On Tue Sep 29 12:31:39 2009, Mads Randstoft wrote: After some talks at the jabber dev MUC, it seems there is a need to be able to add more data to a node and more data to an item than is currently possible in a std. way. Right, specifically, we've seen developer interest in both priority (a

[Standards] XMPP-0060 meta data enhancement

Title: Signatur After some talks at the jabber dev MUC, it seems there is a need to be able to add more data to a node and more data to an item than is currently possible in a std. way. I am no generalist however, so I am not quite sure how to do this well, all I have looked at is a way to add

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

Hi, On 2009/09/29, at 11:20, Paul Witty wrote: As a bit of background on what I'm trying to do, I'm implementing a SIP to XMPP/Jingle gateway. The gateway is connected to the XMPP server as a component (e.g. sipgw.xmppserver.com) and so the Jingle client can make a call to 1.2@sipgw.xm

Re: [Standards] Presence and components

Nathan Fritz wrote: On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:33 AM, Paul Witty wrote: Is there documented anywhere the rules of how presence information works with components? e.g. can components subscribe to clients' presence information, or send presence probes etc. Likewise, can a component publish presen