Re: [Uri-review] [apps-discuss] XMPP jabber: URI scheme not registered?

[Graham Klyne <[e-mail]>]

Peter,

To be clear about this, are you saying that the apparent requirement in RFC6120 
to use namespace jabber:server or jabber:client for "message", "presence" or 
"iq" stanzas no longer applies?  If I were implementing XMPP based on what I 
read here, I would think that these namespaces *are* required, which suggests a 
problem with the XMPP spec.

(I noticed the other namespaces, but since they all seemed to be urn: URIs I 
ignored them for this discussion.)

#g
--

On 26/11/2012 22:56, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/26/12 3:45 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> On 26/11/2012 20:29, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> Agreed. We would register it immediately as historical.
>>
>> Is this strictly true?  After all, doesn't XMPP still require use
>> of jabber:client or jabber:server as namespaces for stanzas in XMPP
>> streams?
>
> RFC 4395 says:
>
>     In some circumstances, it is appropriate to note a URI scheme that
>     was once in use or registered but for whatever reason is no longer in
>     common use or the use is not recommended.
>
> I definitely think that 'jabber:' is not recommended. Various XML
> namespaces with the 'jabber:' "scheme" are still in wide use, but we
> have not minted any such namespaces since 1999 or 2000.
>
>> My original email cited an out-of-date RFC, but I did check back
>> later: [[ Definition of XML Stanza:  An XML stanza is the basic
>> unit of meaning in XMPP.  A stanza is a first-level element (at
>> depth=1 of the stream) whose element name is "message", "presence",
>> or "iq" and whose qualifying namespace is 'jabber:client' or
>> 'jabber:server'. ]] --
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6120#section-4.1
>>
>> In light of this, my take is that jabber: is a current but very
>> limited URI scheme, defining just two URIs (jabber:server and
>> jabber:client) for use in XMPP streams.  No other URIs or uses for
>> this scheme are sanctioned.
>
> Actually there are more namespaces than just those two (we minted
> about twenty of them in the early days of XMPP before we realized the
> error of our ways). A full list can be found at
> http://xmpp.org/registrar/namespaces.html -- but we haven't minted any
> new ones in a long time and we're not about to start doing so again.
>
> Peter
>
> - --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlCz86QACgkQNL8k5A2w/vw3MQCg6UjFltp87J9ZfDbVD6/++S4i
> yqEAoKbjXUHPvAvVatJh8B9p4n1VB4lW
> =Imzk
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>