* Sam Whited <s...@samwhited.com> [2017-02-06 10:15]: > > Ah right, another unfortunate design decision. > > Not at all; the nonzas are semantically correct here because it > doesn't make sense to have the CSI enable/disable "commands" be > routable.
I principally agree with your point, and I'm not explicitly blaming CSI for using nonzas. On the other hand, nonzas were introduced in 0198 as a kind of meta-element that is required to count actual elements without interfering with them, and now CSI ended up (ab)using them as well. If I were going to redesign everything in XMPP, I'd probably differentiate between "stanzas" (routable elements), "nonzas" (non- routed elements between the user's client and their server; these could also be used for other XEPs like Carbons to avoid devs' security sloppyness), and "SM nonzas" which are the only ones explicitly excempt from XEP-0198 counters. Georg -- || http://op-co.de ++ GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N ++ || gpg: 0x962FD2DE || o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+ || || Ge0rG: euIRCnet || X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e++++ h- r++ y? || ++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_________________________________________________||
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
