Re: [Stox] Review on -presence

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Mon, 12 August 2013 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E88A21F9ADF for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.139
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.139 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.690, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PqtVt4VxAzte for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ABF821F9F12 for <stox@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ergon.local (unknown [64.101.72.39]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FA6FE833F; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:47:40 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <5209493D.3060207@stpeter.im>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:44:45 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sa=FAl_Ibarra_Corretg=E9?= <saul@ag-projects.com>
References: <0CB65FBA-7262-4189-8852-5FC08A34D50D@ag-projects.com> <51F99063.30203@stpeter.im> <51FCB717.6080200@stpeter.im> <C283698E-8E43-41CF-BE49-1D99553D6FCF@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <C283698E-8E43-41CF-BE49-1D99553D6FCF@ag-projects.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "stox@ietf.org" <stox@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Stox] Review on -presence
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP-TO-XMPP Working Group discussion list <stox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/stox>
List-Post: <mailto:stox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 20:44:52 -0000

On 8/7/13 3:43 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
> 
> On Aug 3, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> 
>> On 8/1/13 12:32 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> On 7/30/13 5:33 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> - Using ID-123kdklejd doesn't seem to work as a valid xs:ID,
>>>> TID-1234 does work though, so we could use TID- as the prefix
>>>> for tuple identifiers in examples and such.
>>> 
>>> I will double-check that against the XML specification.
>> 
>> Hmm. Here is what I see in the XML schema datatype specification:
>> 
>> The ·value space· of ID is the set of all strings that ·match· the 
>> NCName production in [Namespaces in XML].
>> 
>> Where the NCName production is defined as follows:
>> 
>> NCName 	::= 	(Letter | '_') (NCNameChar)*
>> 
>> What software are you using for validation? I'm not seeing a
>> constraint that an xs:ID needs to begin with three letters.
>> 
> 
> I tested it with lxml, a Python wrapper for libxml2. I complained
> because 'ID-123' was too ambiguous for an xs:ID. Not sure if it's an
> implementation detail / issue though.

Sounds like it.

In RFC 6120, it's suggested to make the XMPP resourcepart a UUID.
Something like ID-2E855EFA-DA21-48F1-A6EB-18B5231893AC won't trigger
warnings about ambiguity. :-)

Would it help to change some of the examples?

Peter

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