[Stox] review of core (was: Re: review of core, chat, groupchat and presence)

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

Hi Philipp, thanks for the review. I'm splitting up my replies for
easier tracking...

On 8/8/13 12:33 PM, Philipp Hancke wrote:
> I just noticed i reviewed -00 from the draft package... but anyway,
> quite a number of nits. Read them coming from XMPP land.
> 
> Comments prefixed with example of section number.
> editorial comments:
> - inconsistent usage of note. sometimes (Note: ...) other times (-im,
>   presence) Note:
> - chat and im prefix examples with '|'
> 

I'll review the documents for consistency, because I like consistency. :)

> core:
>     the draft says:
>          instant messaging and presence applications of XMPP also
>          need to support im: and pres: URIs
>          as specified in [RFC3860] and [RFC3859] respectively
>     while this is encouraged in RFC 6121, those are informative
>     references.

If I understand your comment correctly, you might agree with the
following change...

OLD
   The XMPP address format is specified in [RFC6122]; as discussed in
   [RFC6121], instant messaging and presence applications of XMPP also
   need to support 'im:' and 'pres:' URIs as specified in [RFC3860] and
   [RFC3859] respectively, although such support might simply involve
   leaving resolution of such addresses up to an XMPP server.

NEW
   The XMPP address format is specified in [RFC6122]; in addition,
   [RFC6121] encourages instant messaging and presence applications of
   XMPP to support 'im:' and 'pres:' URIs as specified in [RFC3860] and
   [RFC3859] respectively, although such support might simply involve
   leaving resolution of such addresses up to an XMPP server.

>     4.2 bullet 1: ref to jid escaping xep here instead of in bullet 3

It seems to me that the reference is appropriate in both places, so
adding it to bullet 1 seems reasonable.

>     5.1: <policy-violation/> is missing from the list.

Good catch. What SIP response code do you suggest mapping that to? The
best option I can see is "400 Bad Request".

Peter

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