I vaguely remember one of the authors of XMPP invented an alternative protocol which is simpler, perhaps based on JSON, anyone remember? Using XML these days seems too heavy weight.
Maybe you mean this? http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0295.html
XMPP and Jabber
11–20 of 41 posts
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#12I vaguely remember one of the authors of XMPP invented an alternative protocol which is simpler, perhaps based on JSON, anyone remember? Using XML these days seems too heavy weight.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#13What I've really wanted to figure out for awhile now is how XMPP might work as a replacement for email. Even as new IMAP or Gmail clients appear on the market seemingly every few months now, I can't shake the idea that it's time for a new protocol, alas an impossibly tall order. Yet XMPP seems like the closest thing to an existing, modern standard to build upon. Am I tilting at windmills, or is there any validity to…
XMPP is not that clear [0] what happens, if the recipient is offline. I'm not sure, what the popular servers (Google, Facebook, etc) do in practice.
As a proof of concept. It should be easy to implement a "shortcut send" into an email client, which sends a mail directly over XMPP, if sender and recipient are both online with this client.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#14I vaguely remember one of the authors of XMPP invented an alternative protocol which is simpler, perhaps based on JSON, anyone remember? Using XML these days seems too heavy weight.
XMPP's XML overhead isn't as large as you might think; it compresses well, and streaming XML parsers can be pretty fast.
XML's extensibility is one of the reasons that XMPP has so many XEPs. A JSON-based protocol would need a central registry or some kind of namespaces to achieve the same thing.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#15What I've really wanted to figure out for awhile now is how XMPP might work as a replacement for email. Even as new IMAP or Gmail clients appear on the market seemingly every few months now, I can't shake the idea that it's time for a new protocol, alas an impossibly tall order. Yet XMPP seems like the closest thing to an existing, modern standard to build upon. Am I tilting at windmills, or is there any validity to…
What, exactly, do you want to do with it, and how does it replace email? (Genuinely curious - I see suggestions for replacing email on a regular basis, but rarely ones that are deeply thought out.)
Sometimes even the topic is what makes the difference (not even location or device) between talking synchronous or asynchronously. I'm not a very assiduous Facebook user, but at some point I've noticed it can blur the edge between sync/async. Maybe it is not perfect (and maybe it is no longer there), but I think its possible to mix both ideas. Neither should be left out.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#16I never fully understood why everybody is using XMPP in walled gardens (e.g. Whatsapp, Facebook, Messages...). Do you think they get anything from that? Is any of those services monetized successfully?
Because they don't care? Whatsapp is a monstrosity.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#17I never fully understood why everybody is using XMPP in walled gardens (e.g. Whatsapp, Facebook, Messages...). Do you think they get anything from that? Is any of those services monetized successfully?
Seemly Whatsapp is, and what they are doing is genius, I would pay even more for the service than what they are charging (99 cents year). At first I did not understood, what it had in special, until I figured that it was the fact that it used your phone contact list, thus taking out the boring task of managing that, and making adding people to your list easy as finding someone phone number. Yet, I would not use it as…
Why would you pay for such service if one can get a normal secure and federated XMPP service for free? Whatsapp offers no advantages of XMPP (no interoperability and no federation) and only adds problems (flawed security). Paying money for such kind of disservice is simply strange.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#18I'm implementing a Google Talk jabber client and I'm curious whether or not it allows sending messages as links. It doesn't seem to automatically parse them into clickable ones. Not much luck on the XML alteration....
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#19What I've really wanted to figure out for awhile now is how XMPP might work as a replacement for email. Even as new IMAP or Gmail clients appear on the market seemingly every few months now, I can't shake the idea that it's time for a new protocol, alas an impossibly tall order. Yet XMPP seems like the closest thing to an existing, modern standard to build upon. Am I tilting at windmills, or is there any validity to…
XMPP is not that clear [0] what happens, if the recipient is offline. I'm not sure, what the popular servers (Google, Facebook, etc) do in practice. As a proof of concept. It should be easy to implement a "shortcut send" into an email client, which sends a mail directly over XMPP, if sender and recipient are both online with this client. [0] http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0160.html
I have witnessed somewhat normal network situations (being connected to XMPP server while connecting / disconnecting to a VPN server) that have caused a stable and mature Jabber client (psi) not actually send messages even though it seems that it did successfully send them.
For a mature messaging protocol, that smells really really bad for any serious use.
Re: XMPP and Jabber
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seemly Whatsapp is, and what they are doing is genius, I would pay even more for the service than what they are charging (99 cents year). At first I did not understood, what it had in special, until I figured that it was the fact that it used your phone contact list, thus taking out the boring task of managing that, and making adding people to your list easy as finding someone phone number. Yet, I would not use it as…
Why would you pay for such service if one can get a normal secure and federated XMPP service for free? Whatsapp offers no advantages of XMPP (no interoperability and no federation) and only adds problems (flawed security). Paying money for such kind of disservice is simply strange.
Adoption. That is one of the main reasons why most people won't mind paying for whatsapp ; almost everyone on their contacts list already uses the app and frankly most people don't know or care much about whatsapp's security measures.