Hi Philipp, thanks for your feedbacks
> - There is an attr missing that defines if the order should be ascending or > descending, just order by creation is not specific enough to me. > > - There is a part where it says with RSM you can change the order. This is > kind of wrong. With RSM you can in a result set page backwards, but you > cant influence the order of items within the page. I wanted to keep the XEP as simple as possible, but it's true that the order inside the page is not influenced. On the other hand, this is trivial to do client side, and once you know the order (most recent always on top), I don't see the need to complicate the XEP. I should formulate more explicitly the ordering inside the page. > - I feel its not really necessary to mention SQL and ORDER BY anywhere in > the document Probably yes, I'll remove the references on next update if the XEP is accepted. > - Business Rules: Its a first for me that a XEP depends on the order of > nodes in a stanza, i think it would be better to just add an attr that > defines the order. Also conflict seems the wrong word in this context to me. Indeed "conflict" is not the best wording, I'll change the formulation. About order of nodes, I don't see this as a problem, and having an attribute with priority would imply to sort the items once received and check for errors (missing sequence, or 2 elements with the same priority). Not that this is such a difficult thing to do, but it doesn't seem needed. Is there any implementation in the wild which would have issue with node order? When you get the result of a pubsub get query, the order of items is also significant. ++ Goffi _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
