[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: MUC Auto-Join

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 1 Jun 2007, at 21:32, Chris Mullins wrote:
>> There are two solutions I like a bit more, both of which are more work:
>> 1 - A "Startup" section in private storage
>> 2 - Adding metadata into the items on a roster
> 
> There's a third option, which is to keep with the solution we have 
> (0048), just updating it to the new pubsub-based system when appropriate.
> 
> I've never been quite sure why we desire to get rid of 0048 in favour of 
> putting mucs in the roster, because they're not really chat entities, 
> and have very different semantics. 

Who said the roster is only for buddies? To my mind it is for JIDs. A 
MUC room has a JID, so I see no reason not to put it in the roster. Same 
thing for anything else that has a JID.

> So I guess the questions I have are:
> 1) What do we gain from putting mucs in a roster (in protocol) which we 
> don't already have?

Presence.

And presence gives you entity capabilities.

And entity capabilities gives you helpful information that obviates the 
need for formal roster categories or item metadata -- you get it for 
free in presence.

> 2) What are the problems with 0048 (iq:private notwithstanding)?

I've never liked the fact that it combines JIDs and URLs in one storage 
format -- you do very different things with XMPP entities and HTTP 
locations. Talk about different semantics! But that objection is more 
aesthetic than anything else.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070601/23f02a36/smime.bin