[jdev] [Standards] Presence of type "available" not allowed?

[Peter Saint-Andre]

On 05/03/2008 2:51 PM, Remko Tronçon wrote:
>>  1. Modify existing documentation and implementations to a more strict
>>  behavior that would treat values not mentionned in RFC 3921 as illegal.
> 
> What documentation mentions the type 'available'? I know some (older)
> implementations used to use 'available' as a type, and most
> implementations just ignore an unknown type and treat it as
> 'available', which i think is a sensible thing to do. If you are a
> purist, you could return an error if you encounter it, but I think
> it's much more work to return errors than ignore it on the client
> side.
> 
> Anyway, if you see the type somewhere, it should be reported as a bug,
> and the software/documentation should be fixed.

I have found two instances of this bug, both in examples from XEP-0200.
They have been corrected:

http://svn.xmpp.org:18080/browse/XMPP/trunk/extensions/xep-0200.xml?r1=1465&r2=1823

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7338 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://www.jabber.org/jdev/attachments/20080503/e58385f3/attachment-0002.bin>