[standards-jig] JEP-115 Redundancy?

Joe Hildebrand JHildebrand at jabber.com
Wed Sep 24 20:54:06 UTC 2003

I apparently need to make this clearer in the doc, but a client's
capabilities are the union of the disco#info for node#version and
node#ext1..n, where the client put node, ver, and ext1..n in the clientcaps
element.  The whole thing is done so that you don't have to a) put the
disco#info in each presence or b) query each user each time they log in,
since the information doesn't change.

The presence annotation is just a pointer to the union of the disco#info's,
to reduce network traffic.

Joe Hildebrand


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Muldowney [mailto:temas at box5.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 12:11 PM
> To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> Subject: [standards-jig] JEP-115 Redundancy?
> I'm reading JEP-115 and section 4.2 seems very redundant to 
> me.  It seems that you are using disco, to do disco, but no 
> actually as disco?  
> Confused?  That's how I felt reading it.  Why are 
> capabilities being sent seperate of an actual disco 
> request/reply?  Is there are reason we have to be able to 
> send capabilities in regular disco replies and as a 
> capablities list to the seperate namespace?  Reading again 
> tonight for further comprehension and more comments.
> --temas
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig

More information about the Standards mailing list