On 11 Jun 2018, at 15:20, Sam Whited <s...@samwhited.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, at 09:15, Kevin Smith wrote: >> I’m not sure that’s necessary, given that the current protocol was >> designed to allow exactly this. > > Was it? I was reading this whole conversation in the context of: > >> support for this SHOULD NOT be assumed without further negotiation.
Yeah, I meant the protocol rather than the business rules. > which I assumed meant a new namespace that is advertised alongside the > existing one. Right. I think you can simply add another namespace to disco, and not change anything else, and be guaranteed ok. > That being said, I'm not against a namespace bump by any means and now that > you mention it I'm also not sure that one would be necessary, if we can get > away with no new protocol or namespaces I'd be very happy. Right :) /K _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
