[JDEV] Info/Query && filter proposals..

Anders Qvist quest at netg.se
Wed Aug 18 05:07:38 CDT 1999

New revision of Jabber filter proposal. Grab at:


On Tue, 17 Aug 1999, Scott Robinson wrote:

> Interleaved response.
> Scott.
> * Thomas D. Charron translated into ASCII [Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 09:35:10AM -0700][<NMCONLOMPHFMCAAA at my-deja.com>]
> [snap]
> >   Make the filter data PART of the private info..
> > 
> The problem comes in to if I want a filter for my current login only. Also,
> I can imagine the syntax being quite weird. How are you going to implement
> it?

Using the info/query system to store the filters is a good idea.
I'll add a note of this in the implementation notes. Having
non-persistent filters is a problem the client has to take care of
for now, I think. However, having filters on a per-conneciton basis would
be a good idea. Let me think about that for a while.
> >   This way, proxy transports such as logging in to
> > your jabbertransport ID via IRC, would be able to
> > retrieve your data easily, along with making it
> > REALLY easy for other things to SET your filters.
> > 
> True, and we want to work on a persistent filter or something along those
> lines. If I set a deny for "so-and-so at penis.com" then I want them to be
> denied on ALL my logins.
> >   This would also allow for public inheritable
> > filters across entire systems, such as querying
> > for the filter info from a <Target>SERVER</Target>.
> > 
> I didn't see anything in the current implementation that didn't allow for
> inheritable filters. In fact, I assumed they would be implmented.

Filter inheritance? Yes, a good idea ... hm ... problem is you can't
really inherit a hierarchical structure. What would it mean to inherit
another set of filters? Does it mean that the inherited filters should be
placed at some point inside the current filters or does it mean that the
current filter should be enclosed in the inherited filters?

I added a proposal for an include mechanism with namespaces instead. Have
a look at 7.1 in the revised proposal. I think this is easier. If we want
to add global filters to apply to all users/sessions/whatevers, we apply
them before user filter get to say anything - no need for inheritance
> >   Oh, and Anders Qvist, when saying this:
> > 
> > <filter messagesize="1000k"></filter>
> > 
> >   you can more easily, and breif:
> > 
> > <filter messagesize="1000k"/>

I don't see what this will gain us (except making filter descriptions a
few bytes shorter). It will increase interpretation complexity slightly.

Anders "Quest" Qvist
NetGuide Scandinavia

And we who listen to the sky, or walk the dusty grade,
Or break the very atoms down, to see how they are made,
Or study cells, or living things, seek truth with open hand;
The profoundest act of worship is to try to understand.

-- Catherine Faber, "The Word of God"

More information about the JDev mailing list