16 Feb
2004
16 Feb
'04
3:45 p.m.
On 16-02 13:12, Harry Behrens wrote:
Because interoperability with MS is an important
issue, that`s why.
Whether they are compatible to RFCXXXX is secondary, MS-compatible is -
whether one likes it or not - just as important as standard-compliance.
With this kind of attitude we would end up with MSSIP which would be
incompatible with everything else, even different versions of their
software. Is that what you want ?
Just try to send an IM from WM 5.0 to WM 4.7.
I have no problem with extending ser to support their extensions as
long as:
1) It does not affect the standard compliance and interoperability of
SER.
2) Someone else is going to implement it and will take care of it.
And like Atle says, people have done it before in the
IM world - out of
exactly those reasons.
In case anybody is interested in actually doing this, we could probably
contribute to some degree. We always have requests for
precisely this interoperability - as has this mailing list.
As I said, somebody else would have to contribute this.
One has to be pragmatic in designing a product -
rather than just being
"right",
One has to be pragmatic and resist the temptation to blindly implement
proprietary extensions of one big vendor who will sooner or later
change his implementation anyway.
Jan.