On 7/11/11 6:26 PM, Waqas Hussain wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:26 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor<edi...@xmpp.org> wrote:
The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP.
Title: XMPP Compliance Suites 2012
Abstract: This document defines XMPP protocol compliance levels for 2012.
URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/compliance2012.html
The XMPP Council will decide at its next meeting whether to accept this
proposal as an official XEP.
Some thoughts:
One caveat: that inbox item was simply copied without modification from
the 2010 compliance suite (XEP-0270). We neglected to publish a
compliance suite in 2011, so XEP-0270 reflects the state of the art in
mid-2009.
Why is BOSH included in the list when we say "* Support can be enabled
via an external component or an internal server module/plugin."? Any
XMPP compliant server would pass that, so there's no point in making
this an explicit item.
See Dave's comments.
RFC 6122 is missing.
Yes, we need to add that.
I'm assuming the XSF is using the compliance XEPs as a tool to
encourage implementation.
In part. Ideally we would use the compliance suites for testing
purposes, but to do that we would need a testing program or protocol
validator or something along those lines. Yet to be developed...
If that is correct, then:
There's a case to be made for caps support for Advanced Server, as
some servers do flood users with PEP without taking caps into account.
+1
(Although we have bugs to fix in XEP-0115...)
What is the case for Chat State Notifications for Advanced Client? I
mean it's useful, just like a hundred other XEPs, but is it useful
enough to be made into a compliance requirement?
I think it is.
Now, things which are missing, but shouldn't be:
Working file transfer should be a requirement for Advanced Client.
We're pushing to finish the Jingle file transfer specs this year, but it
might be too early to mandate support for them because their status is
as follows:
1. XEP-0260 (Jingle SOCKS5 Bytestreams Transport Method) is currently in
Last Call. Please review it and provide feedback.
2. XEP-0261 (Jingle In-Band Bytestreams Transport Method) is currently
in Last Call. Please review it and provide feedback.
3. XEP-0234 (Jingle File Transfer) is still Experimental. It might need
more work.
I hope that the 2013 compliance suite for advanced clients can mandate
XEP-0234 support.
I'm not sure if audio/video support should be a compliance requirement
for Advanced Client, but some would think so.
In the past we talked about defining a "Multimedia Client" suite. Not
all clients want or need to do audio/video.
And finally, I'd personally like Message Receipts being included in
more clients. They make a huge difference when you are on a bad
network (e.g., most mobile networks outside of central city areas
across the world).
That's worth discussing. As Dave and Matthew noted, XEP-0198 would be
very good to add to the compliance suite, too.
