Hi Pedro,
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Pedro Melo wrote:
> Example 5 of XEP-0244 introduces a xs: namespace prefix without a proper
> declaration. Are the authors assuming that the declaration is going to be in
> the top level header? What happens when this stanza crosses to an
> outgoing S
Dear Wasaq,
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Waqas Hussain wrote:
> Some problems with the XEP:
>
> 1. The XEP basically allows a service to expose a set of global functions.
> There is no possibility for function namespaces. This is similar to the SOAP
> over XMPP XEP, where you can have only one
Hi all,
not sure I am supposed to reply to this as author of the XEP, but here
goes... I hope it will trigger more replies to the call.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:33 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to
> clarify an exi
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Dean Collins wrote:
> Basically it is an ajax/xmpp site with 2430 chat rooms set up over the
> next 6 months for people to talk about specific Baseball games.
Interesting... I have been thinking about making a web front end for
IO-DATA services, assuming there mus
that would
contradict, I think, the last statement.
So, my questions is, is the one of the libraries we use wrong, or,
alternatively, can IQ stanza never overwrite the default namespace?
Looking forward to your opinions on how to interpret this part of the
XMPP specification,
kind regards,
Egon W
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Fabio Forno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While it's true that in SOAP+XMPP specs there is no asynchronous
> message exchange pattern (and that was a mistake, though I think it's
> possible to add a new MEP), this is not related to REST. Neither the
> concept of
