[Standards] XEP-0126 invisibility interpretation
Mickaël Rémond
mickael.remond at process-one.net
Wed Feb 14 15:01:23 CST 2007
Hello,
Le 13 févr. 07 à 23:17, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
> Maybe we can take some time at FOSDEM / DevCon to discuss XEP-0186. :)
Yes, very good idea.
I am not totally sure that invisibility is a misuse of privacy list.
The good thing, that I do not see addressed here is being visible for
some people and invisible for others.
Yes, I have seen that directed presence are delivered. That's client
side behaviour and one thing that might be hard to manage is the case
when new contact become available. They probe you and will see you
offline, but if in your client side policy they were supposed to see
you, the client must react to their available presence by sending a
directed presence.
What I am trying akwardly to say here, is that from the client point
of view, it is not 'fire your presence packets and forget', but
rather, keep track of all your contact presence and react accordingly.
--
Mickaël Rémond
http://www.process-one.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070214/194cb26e/attachment.html
More information about the Standards
mailing list