Re: Websockets RFC: stream: prefix required or not?

Florian Schmaus <[email protected]> Mon, 02 Feb 2015 20:24:11 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.network.jabber.devel
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On 02.02.2015 18:39, Michael Weibel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> MongooseIM currently sends stream:features as „features“ for websockets connections and strophe.js doesn’t recognize this currently[1].
> How I read the RFC is that both behaviours (stream:features or just „features“) are correct:
> 
>>    Note that for stream features and errors, there is no parent context
>>    element providing the "stream" namespace prefix as in [RFC6120], and
>>    thus the stream prefix MUST be declared or use an unprefixed form:
>>
>>    <stream:features xmlns:stream="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams">
>>      <bind xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-bind"/>
>>    </stream:features>
>>
>>    -- OR --
>>
>>    <error xmlns="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams">
>>      <host-unknown xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-streams'/>
>>    </error>
> 
> I think the example in the RFC is not perfect, it should instead show the format for both cases and I think that’s also the source of confusion. 
> 
> What is your opinion on this? Is MongooseIM or Strophe.js’ behaviour correct?

Doesn't this come down to the question if

<foo:bar xmlns:foo="http://foo.org">…</bar>

and

<bar xmlns="http://foo.org">…</bar>

are equivalent?

And it appears to be that they are. So I'd say that strophe's behavior
is not correct.

Florian

_______________________________________________
JDev mailing list
Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 668 B)