[Standards-JIG] NEW: Message Archiving

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Tue Jun 8 21:21:49 UTC 2004

On Tuesday 08 June 2004 3:06 am, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> > Currently, the above scenario would result in 3 separate
> > chat interfaces (you with obviously 3 clients, and me with 3 different
> > chat windows under one client), and 3 different <thread> values.
> The <thread> values would be different only if one of clients used is
> broken or the "moving" participant always initiates each chat part. This
> is not true in most of my "moving" chats.

If the "non-moving" participant initiates the chat, he would have to begin a 
new chat with a new resource, and you'd have a new thread.

> > Fine, but we should at least have a "type" attribute that would provide
> > some guarantees:
> >  1) if type=muc, all jids have the same bare jid
> >  2) if type=chat, there are only two jids in the whole collection
> Why not just use standard XMPP message types? "groupchat", "chat",
> "message" and "headline". What more do we need?

Should we differentiate a collection of "normal" messages vs a collection of 
"chat" messages?  I suppose we could, but I was thinking 'chat' could mean 
any kind of two-party discussion.  In that case, the types wouldn't exactly 
match that of xmpp.


More information about the Standards mailing list