authorization-identifier versus authorization-identity in SASL2 and BIND2

Why is XEP-0386 (BIND2) talking about <authorization-identity/> at [1] whereas 
XEP-0388 (SASL2) is talking about <authorization-identifier/> at [2]?

Bot specs use it for exactly the same thing: communicating the bare or full 
jid (if a bind occured). Why this double-element? XEP-0388 even states
> If the Client is now authenticated, the Server sends a <success/> element, 
which contains an <authorization-identifier/> element containing the negotiated 
identity - this is a bare JID, unless resource binding has occurred, in which 
case it is a full JID.

So it seems like a perfect fit to communicate the full jid after bind using the 
SASL2 element, why was this extra BIND2 element added?

-tmolitor

[1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0386.html#identifiers
[2] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html#success



_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]