> urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
What's not to love?
/K
Maciek Niedzielski wrote:
Joe Hildebrand wrote:
On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:47 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
+1. Love it.
Yeah, I wanted to suggest something like this, too.
It makes the XEP Editor's life much easier when a spec advances to
Draft:
s/urn:xmpp:tmp/urn:xmpp/g
On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:47 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
The "tmp" tree would be only for experimental protocols. Once the spec
advances to Draft, the Registrar would assign real namespaces like:
urn:xmpp:foo
+1. Love it.
--
Joe Hildebrand
Maciek Niedzielski wrote:
> Joe Hildebrand wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:47 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
>> +1. Love it.
> Yeah, I wanted to suggest something like this, too.
It makes the XEP Editor's life much easier when a spec advances to Draft:
s/urn:xmpp:tmp/urn:xmpp
Joe Hildebrand wrote:
On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:47 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
+1. Love it.
Yeah, I wanted to suggest something like this, too.
--
Maciek Niedzielski
xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The existing temporary namespaces are a pain:
http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-.html#ns (and so on)
I think it might be easier to assign temporary namespaces like this:
urn:xmpp:tmp:foo
The "tmp" tree would be only for experimental protocols. Once the spec
advances to Draft, the Registrar
