| I'm going to reply to some of your points because they're misguided: > resilience against servers going down The matrix model and the XMPP model are different. They solve orthogonal problems. Even the matrix people say it. That's like saying emails are better than github for collaboration because they are resilient against servers going down: it's true, but it's a different model. Not suitable for everyone. > resilience against malicious federation Wait for matrix to be taken up by big tech companies, you'll see spam flooding. I don't welcome it, but it's all about economics > Json instead of XML This is both subjective and shows the lack of understanding that extensibility is, and how json only does 1/10 of what proper XML can do. > unified specification Not all XMPP usages are the same. If you want messaging, you use the compliance suites, which are specs: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/cs-2022.html#im > handling of E2EE with multiple devices and message history Has been working for years already: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0384.html > not need to rely on other servers for media access Part of the standard installation of prosody and ejabberd, arguably two of the most known servers, for years. A few lines in the conf. Matrix solves problems and creates others. Your information is outdated by almost a decade, which probably explains why you think matrix solves these. |
Can you elaborate on this a bit more? Specifically what can XML do that JSON can't?
I know the feature set is technically larger (eg namespaces, schemas, etc), but AFAIK all those features aren't necessary for transporting messages.
I even consider some things in XML (or at least in common implementations) to be nuisances, like collapsing elements into properties, or some accepting either or both without a schema, and I'm never sure what the precedence rules are. Also, due to being a simpler spec, JSON is more widely available, and generally faster to parse too.