On 8/30/07 4:14 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Boyd Fletcher wrote: >> >> >> On 8/30/07 1:50 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> +1 for adding to the registry but we should remove LZW from XEP-138 and move >> its description text to registry. > > +1 to specifying the LZW usage in a separate spec, -1 to adding lots of > text to the registry. > > Peter add the text just explains the justification for why it was added which can be helpful for people in trying to understand whether its worth implementing or not.
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compression Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compressio... Joe Hildebrand
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compressio... Boyd Fletcher
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Justin Karneges
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Boyd Fletcher
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Jonathan Chayce Dickinson
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Dave Cridland
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Boyd Fletcher
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Boyd Fletcher
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0138 vs. TLS compre... Jonathan Chayce Dickinson