> I'm sure there were good reasons for both these suggestions - I can > understand why if we upgrade the usage we can upgrade the namespace, > but what is the motivation for suggesting two different namespaces for > the same job?
It will take some time until server software is upgraded to 3921bis, and until then, they may not route jabber:iq:roster packages to components (because of the special treatment of jabber:iqRoster in 3921). A new protocol will not have this problem. cheers, Remko
