[jdev] jabber.org not conforming to JEP standards

[Tomasz Sterna]

2005/8/8, Chris Chen <ckchris at idream.net>:
> It would be nice if either another JEP replaces the
> old one OR the current JEP indicates that additional fields can be
> added.
> My point is that it's not the semantics that I am concerned about.
> It's the communication.  If two devices cannot communicate based on
> one protocol, then there is no point in having such a protocol
> because the protocol is not doing what it should be doing -- bridging
> communication gaps.

It's the whole beauty of XML (and the mail reason it was chosen I
guess) that you can extend it without breaking the old.

You don't need to ask anyone if you could add something to the protocol stanzas.
Until you follow all MUSTs and MUST NOTs - you don't break
compatibility with existing implementation.
If the client does not understand stanza or its element it silently
ignores it and untill every field it requires to work is there - it
works.
Another client that understand the extension is able to make advantage of it.

For example, when the succesor for groupchat protocol was discussed,
there was a proposal of a superior protocol that would completly
replace groupchat. It was discarded in favor of multi user conference,
that is an extension to groupchat (enchancement to an enchancement).
This way good old Psi is able to join and participate in muc chats
when it still supports only groupchat protocol. :-)

-- 
smk