On 12/8/2011 10:47 AM, Ralph Meijer wrote:
On 2011-08-12 10:37 , Mike Wacker wrote:
In all the examples I've seen in XEPs, disco#info results have been
ordered like this:
[..]
The schema in XEP-0030 would at least imply an order for identities
and features, but it has always been the case that those schema are
descriptive, not normative.
I believe this is a mistake in the schema. It should probably use
xs:all instead. In general we try to prevent dependence on order if at
all possible.
--
ralphm
So the main takeaway, if I understand this correctly, would be that if
even the schema implies an order, I shouldn't assume any particular
order unless the RFC or XEP explicitly calls it out.
As another example, for RFC 6120, the client namespace in A.5 implies
that while the "normal" content (<show>, <status>, and <priority>) can
come in any order for presence stanzas, all extended content must come
after all "normal" content. But unless RFC 6120 specifically calls out
that ordering constraint (and it doesn't as far as I can tell), the
server should be able to handle, for example:
<show>xa</show><c
xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/caps'...><status>Vacation!</status>
Mike
