Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-05 Thread Ashley Ward
We don't use it in emite either. Also clients which do implement it should fall back gracefully to utf-8 anyway. -- Ash On 04/02/2013 21:57, Stefan Strigler ste...@strigler.de wrote: JSJaC doesn't either. And at least the old implementation of ejabberd's mod_http_bind didn't as well. .Steve

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-05 Thread Steffen Larsen
True true, Ive been looking on some other client implementations as well, and they do not implements it as well. So I think it seems sane to remove it. /Steffen On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote: We don't use it in emite either. Also clients which do

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-05 Thread Peter Saint-Andre (psaintan)
As I recall this was added to support really ok browsers. Sent from mobile, might be terse On Feb 5, 2013, at 4:27 AM, Steffen Larsen zoo...@gmail.com wrote: True true, Ive been looking on some other client implementations as well, and they do not implements it as well. So I think it

[Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-04 Thread Steffen Larsen
Cross-posted from the summit list (sorry making noise). Here are my small notes to the BOSH action list (embedded). /Steffen Begin forwarded message: From: Peter Saint-Andre (psaintan) psain...@cisco.com Subject: Re: [Summit] BOSH actions Date: February 2, 2013 10:18:01 PM GMT+01:00 To:

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-04 Thread Ashley Ward
It would be great to keep them consistent, but is it worth potentially breaking implementations? I think the main problem with accept was that the example was inconsistent with the text. In fact, I very much doubt anyone should be using that option as xmpp mandates the use of utf-8, and I doubt

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-04 Thread Peter Saint-Andre (psaintan)
That sounds sensible. Sent from mobile, might be terse On Feb 4, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote: It would be great to keep them consistent, but is it worth potentially breaking implementations? I think the main problem with accept was that the example was

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-04 Thread Steffen Larsen
Just checked strophe, and it does not use it. I'll check some more implementations that uses BOSH for transport. Maybe that would give us an indication. /Steffen On Feb 4, 2013, at 10:06 PM, Peter Saint-Andre (psaintan) psain...@cisco.com wrote: That sounds sensible. Sent from mobile,

Re: [Standards] Fwd: [Summit] BOSH actions

2013-02-04 Thread Stefan Strigler
JSJaC doesn't either. And at least the old implementation of ejabberd's mod_http_bind didn't as well. .Steve Am 04.02.2013 um 22:39 schrieb Steffen Larsen zoo...@gmail.com: Just checked strophe, and it does not use it. I'll check some more implementations that uses BOSH for transport. Maybe