- From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@jabber.org>
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:39:41 -0600
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Via the archives (sorry, I didn't know this was a public list), I have been following the conversation regarding the XML restrictions in the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). As you may know, XMPP is the IETF's adaptation of the Jabber protocol, which was developed mainly in 1998 and 1999 within the community that formed around the open-source Jabber IM server project. As far as I know (I became involved in late 1999), the Jabber community did not base any of its work on SOAP, so the similarities are a case of independent development. BTW, XMPP is perhaps even more similar to BEEP than to SOAP -- it is a protocol for streaming XML from point to point and therefore is not document-centric in any way. We definitely do not seek to define an official subset of XML (although if such a subset is defined by the W3C we would ensure our conformance with it). Rather, we seek to restrict what XML may be sent over XMPP-compliant XML streams. Therefore, from the perspective of the W3C, would it be preferable for us to use the phrase "usage convention" rather than the term "subset"? (It seems there is not yet consensus on this.) Also, I think it would it be appropriate to specify strictly that XMPP entities MUST NOT generate PIs, comments, DTD subsets, and entity references (other than the "big 5" predefined entities), and that this restricted data MUST be ignored if received. Therefore I have changed the wording in draft-ietf-xmpp-core (at least in CVS) and would be happy to post the revised text here for review if desired. If you have any other questions or concerns about XMPP, let me know. Thanks. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre Jabber Software Foundation http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2003 18:43:04 UTC