Johannes Wagener wrote: > Proposed XMPP Extension: IO DATA <snip> +1
I'd like to endorse this proposal. While AD-Hoc commands and Data Forms does offer a lot of flexibility, XMPP could benefit from extended capability in terms of representation of in terms of machine-to-machine communications that are outside of XMPP which is operating as a transport layer. I would like to make a suggestion though. I can see this proposal being used in my application framework where I have to ship lots of user interface specifications, SNMP information, accounting information and other stuff around the XMPP network. My current implementation is a hack on top of data-forms and various other namespace hacks. My only reservation is with the error conditions. The proposal currently states that error conditions are handled according to the AD-Hoc commands which IMO is not sufficient. Sure, sending a <cmd:bad-payload /> element in response to a submission is possible, but it doesn't give the machine receiving this error any specific detail as to the nature of the problem, other than a string. Would be nice if there was an <error> element that would specify a schema for errors possibly? I don't know... Apologies if this doesn't make much sense, but it was written on the move... -- Richard
