[standards-jig] UPDATED: Multi-User Chat (JEP 45, v. 0.3)
jabber at dsutton.legend.uk.com
Wed Sep 18 19:33:05 UTC 2002
On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 10:39:42AM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> The only reason I thought it might be nice to send these requests to
> room at service/admin is so that (with this simple protocol) the service does
> not need to fish through message bodies to find '/kick' and so on. If the
> client can flag those (as many clients now do for '/nick') and send them
> to a special reserved resource of room at service, then we can have a fair
> amount of simplicity without formulating new namespaces. However, it could
> be that this is just a protocol hack and it would be better to create a
> special-purpose namespace for this (as I had in version 0.2).
Hmm, to be honest, i'd prefer sending to the room too, for several
reasons. Firstly, you disallow any user called 'admin' (picky, i know,
but someone is going to complain at some point ;) )
The second point is that by having a little piece of code which checks
for messages which begin with a '/', you could allow admins without
x:data support in their client to have control that way. Please note: I
know this is a point of contention with some people, as i've discussed
this before in the jdev room. Having '/' control is simply convenient
for people who are used to IRC. Although, clients like Gabber already
intercept some of the IRC-style commands.
Third point follows..
> (On a side note, I would disagree that room at service/admin must be
> construed as a participant in the room. Rather, it's just some resource
> associated with the room. The jdev room is populated by a number of bots,
> including ChatBot -- which is more of an information resource than a
> participant. Participants are addressed as room at service/nick but that
> doesn't mean room at service/resource is reserved only for participants.
> Nevertheless it may be a hack....)
The thing is that although ChatBot is an information resource, it is
also just a normal user as far as the conference server is concerned.
The GC protocol does state that the resource is used for user
Although ... heres an idea. Make the conference server create a virtual
user called 'admin' in every room created. Use this user then as an
interface for administration or control. If you want to support
irc-style commands for non-x:data clients, you just message 'admin' with
the command, like you can already do with ChatBot - if its going to be
in the user space, why not make it a virtual user?
Email: dsutton at legend.co.uk
Jabber: peregrine at legend.net.uk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Standards