Dear all,
I believe combination of XMPP and EXI should have great synergy and can
extend the world of XMPP far more. However, because this space is very
wide and I think it's better to clarify requirements on this
combination, mainly towards IoT/M2M/sensor network use case of XMPP.
Let me
Dear Peter,
I believe we need to clarify some of 'requirements' first. Maybe, there
could be several approaches for EXI1.0 or maybe we need to propose
something to EXI1.x(maybe x=1), upon such requirement discussion.
Topics may involve:
- Minimal client requirement
- Minimal server requirement
Dear folks,
As Peter mentioned, I believe XMPP and EXI should be a good oppotunity
for both parties to make Internet-of-Things with good richness of data
representation (i.e. end-to-end XML datamodel), responsiveness (i.e.
XMPP IM/PubSub), and integration to real-world use cases (i.e.
I was curious what the definition of constrained is ?
EXI does produce a compact representation of XML (which is good if
constrained is meant to apply to the amount of any output XML representation)
But I think the executable code size of an EXI implementation might not be
appropriate for a
Dear Randy,
From: Randy Turner rtur...@amalfisystems.com
Subject: Re: [Standards] Proposal for including EXI in XMPP
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 08:08:25 -0700
I was curious what the definition of constrained is ?
You're right. Full-spec EXI does require certain amount of codes, but
one can
Dear Randy
Constrained here, apart from the normal English definition, could mean any
reason why they would not otherwise be able to use XMPP as a transport protocol.
One constraint could be allowable packet size. Wireless sensor networks (for
example over 6LowPan) can only send small packets.
Hi
Yes...I understood from the previous message that, for a constrained device,
the implementation would essentially be locked down, to support only the
specific xml protocol snippets that the device would support, which could
significantly reduce the code ROM requirements, compared with a
XEP-0292 uses the XML format defined in RFC 6351. Section 11.3 has an example
vCard. Near the bottom is the logo element with a child uri element. RFC
6352 defines the logo element as containing a child element of value-uri. This
is defined as an element named uri that is any URI type. In
Dear Peter,
(2013/03/15 12:53), Peter Waher wrote:
I believe we need to clarify some of 'requirements' first. Maybe,
there could be several approaches for EXI1.0 or maybe we need to
propose something to EXI1.x(maybe x=1), upon such requirement
discussion.
Topics may involve: - Minimal client
