Re: draft-cridland-xmpp-session-00

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10 June 2014 09:48, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Ralph Meijer <[email protected]> wrote:>  3)
>> Clients already supporting Session Establishment, SHOULD (per the
>>
>> > upcoming version of this draft) skip negotiating Session Establishment.
>>
>> ...when advertised as optional.
>
>
> The odd thing about this draft is that <optional/> is mandatory. An artifact
> of how one writes these things...
>
> Right, I've gone for:
>
> OLD: Clients SHALL ignore such advertisements.
> NEW: Clients MAY ignore such advertisements, and are encouraged to do so.
>
> So in RFC 2119 terms, it's truly optional, but for reasons other than
> interoperability we're encouraging people to avoid the request.
>
> Also, later on, I've added:
>
> NEW: It is important to note that there is no value in performing this
> request, and New clients are expected to elide the request when the
> <optional/> marker is present.

Sounds great, thanks. An example of the stream feature, and a note
saying 'this is only defined in this namespace for this stream
feature' and I'll be happy.

/K