[JDEV] IQ queries sent to client vs. handled by server?

Thomas Charron tcharron at ductape.net
Wed Aug 1 15:47:14 CDT 2001

Quoting Jens Alfke <jens at mac.com>:
> On Wednesday, August 1, 2001, at 09:05 AM, Thomas Charron wrote:
> > The 'to' JID?  An example would be a jabber:iq:browse message.  If I
> > browse
> > to 'tcharron at jabber.org', server handles it.  If I browse
> > to 'tcharron at jabber.org/WinJab', it goes to the resource.
> But the same "Generic XML Namespace Storage" draft says "Generic XML may
> also be stored public or private *on a specific resource*. When the 
> recipient of the iq set is a resource of that user, the namespace is 
> stored only on that resource and that resource then referenced in the 
> main users browse data." (Emphasis mine.) Which implies to me that a 
> later 'get' request made *on that resource* will return the set data, 
> since otherwise why bother putting it there?

  Then this would need to be handled by a servside module. The serverside 
modules can and will recieve ALL iq requests, it's up to the module as to if 
the module is going to let it pass thru to the client or not..  Easy enough...

> (In any case, I'm not talking about jabber:iq:browse, but to namespaces
> that are not known to the server. If that makes a difference.)

  There would need to be TWO layers of namespaces, if this is the case.  ONE 
that would be like 'jabber:iq:storage', and another that would contain the data 
to store:

<iq type='set' to'jid'>
  <storage xmlns='jabber:iq:storage'>
  <homeaddy xmlns='tomscustomdata'>
    <Street>1 Oak Ridge</Street>

  This way, mod_storage, or whatever it's gonna be called, can intercept 
a 'storage' request, and also properly maintain a decent data format..

> Might it be that the real answer is that the 'get' request will be 
> handled by the server only if there is already data stored under that 
> namespace, and otherwise dispatched to the client? That would make the
> most sense to me, and fits in with what Jeremie is so inscrutably 
> alluding to in the draft <http://docs.jabber.org/draft-
> proto/html/xml.html>.

  Yep, that'd be a good way to do it as well..

> (I had a longer gripe here complaining about how incredibly vague much
> of the documentation is, but I thought it over and decided to remove it.
> Except for this allusion to it :)

  'Known Bug'..  8-P

Thomas Charron
<< Wanted: One decent sig >>
<< Preferably litle used  >>

More information about the JDev mailing list