stpeter at jabber.org
Thu Jun 7 15:18:29 CDT 2007
Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On May 31, 2007, at 12:52 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Joe Hildebrand wrote:
>>> Perhaps what we ought to do is put a recommendation in PEP about what
>>> item ID to use when you mean "Please store a single instance of
>>> this". For example:
>> I think private storage is not PEP but some other profile of pubsub,
>> which perhaps has some features in common with PEP (e.g., filtered
>> notifications) but not others (e.g., unlike PEP the default access
>> model is whitelist with the whitelist empty since only the owner needs
>> to have access, and multiple items are allowed since we care about
>> storage rather than pure eventing). Perhaps this can be handled by the
>> previous suggestion of "+private" on the end of the NodeID (I'm still
>> a bit leery about that since pubsub nodes in general are not supposed
>> to have semantic meaning, but XEP-0060 does say that such meaning is
>> OK for particular applications of pubsub). I am in the midst of
>> clarifying the relationship between pubsub and PEP, so hopefully that
>> will help us understand which features can be re-used and which
>> features need to be newly defined in order to create the new private
>> node functionality.
> I'm suggesting that the single-item-ness of a node is orthogonal from
> its private-ness. For example, I might only ever want to publish a
> single geoloc, even though that's not private.
I'm suggesting that the agree-ed-ness of my thinking with your thinking
lacked clear-ed-ness. We're in violent agreement.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070607/bd9c831b/smime.bin
More information about the Standards