On 6/15/11 1:35 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Wed Jun 1 23:55:47 2011, Waqas Hussain wrote:
>> But if we go with tags, do we even need to specify that? We can always
>> add tags later in new namespaces, even defined in new XEPs, e.g.
>> ...
>> or
>> ...
>
> I dislike this, because it's harder for
Generalize my suggestions for XEP-0277 as was asked by Neustradamus.
1. I agreed with Arc Riley that XEP-0277 should not contain "2.7.
Attaching files to a post" as overhead and the reason which is slowing
down acceptance of the standard.
1.1 If attachments will be kept in the XEP it needs to rel=
On Wed Jun 1 23:55:47 2011, Waqas Hussain wrote:
But if we go with tags, do we even need to specify that? We can
always
add tags later in new namespaces, even defined in new XEPs, e.g.
...
or
...
I dislike this, because it's harder for an app to say "Hey, this app
sent me a hash function I
FYI
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kevin Smith
Date: Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:37 PM
Subject: Minutes 20110615
To: XMPP Council
Minutes for Council meeting 20110615.
Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/110615/
1) Roll Call
Matt, Matt, Kevin present. Ralph sends apologies. Nathan
Version 1.0 of XEP-0262 (Use of ZRTP in Jingle RTP Sessions) has been released.
Abstract: This specification defines a Jingle application type for negotiating
one or more sessions that use the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) to
exchange media such as voice or video. The application type inclu
Version 0.5 of XEP-0277 (Microblogging over XMPP) has been released.
Abstract: This specification defines a method for microblogging over XMPP.
Changelog: Changed the commenting Pubsub service from PEP to external. (vs)
Diff: http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0277/diff/0.4/vs/0.5
URL: htt
Version 1.1 of XEP-0171 (Language Translation) has been released.
Abstract: This specification defines an XMPP protocol extension for providing
language translation facilities over XMPP. It supports human, machine,
client-based, and server-based translations.
Changelog: With author approval, th
I'm concerned about the MTI audio codec specified in this XEP (G.711).
A mantra of the IETF (and many standards bodies) is "rough consensus and
running code". We've reached rough consensus on an MTI audio codec, and
this is good, but based on the discussion on the Jingle list I do not
believe we
