[Standards-JIG] JEP-45: Revoking room privileges

Ian Paterson ian.paterson at clientside.co.uk
Sun Jun 20 18:48:30 UTC 2004

Hi Dave,

I understand your vision of things, but believe it introduces unnecessary
functional limitations.

Clearly there must always be at least one owner. However, I don't believe
the author of JEP-0045 intended to prevent the ownership privileges of the
room creator being revoked. There are many situations where a simple
transfer of responsibility for a room is desirable.

I also don't understand the need to prevent a user from revoking their own
ownership privileges. Again, there are scenarios where this would be very

I am interested to understand the reasons you would like to add these
restrictions to JEP-0045 (especially since you are the developer of the most
important implementation of the JEP).

Below is an alternative approach that *might* meet your needs. It adds
functionality to the JEP instead of removing it:

Perhaps your implementation could be changed to make a specifed System Admin
the 'creator' of all rooms? The first person to try to enter a non-existent
room could then be a normal owner (the 'initial' owner currently defined in
the JEP). The System Admin would appear in the list of owners, but his/her
ownership privileges could not be revoked by other owners. The ownership
privileges of the initial owner could be revoked (even by themselves).

This would require two new implementation notes to be added to the JEP:
1. An implementation MAY specify a list of Service Admins that are owners of
all rooms.
2. An implementation MAY specify a list of Service Admins from whom room
ownership cannot be revoked within the scope of this JEP.

The JEP would also need to specify the error message for trying to revoke
ownership privileges from a Service Admin. (It also needs to specify the
error for trying to revoke ownership privileges from the only owner).

Could this help?



David Sutton wrote:
>    I spent part of this morning re-reading the JEP and trying to fit the
> different parts together. I think I now have an idea of how everything
> is meant to work, or at least this is my vision of things.
>    The room 'creator' is a room owner who is responsible for the room.
> There must always be an owner in the room to fulfull that
> responsibility, fulfilling the 'permanent owner' requirement. The JEP
> also permits for owners to demote other owners. To this end, what I
> propose is that an owner can demote any other owner to admin, but not
> themself. This will ensure that there is always one owner at all times.
> For MU-Conference, in the case where a Service Admin demotes the last
> owner, the Service Admin is considered the room 'creator'.
> Your thoughts?

> Ian Paterson wrote:
> >>  The issue is that the JEP states that you are unable to modify
> >>information of a user who is the same level or higher than you.
> >>Thus an owner can change an admin to none, but an owner
> >>can't modify another owner.
> >
> >
> >
> > I reread all the relevant parts of the JEP but I couldn't find
> the section
> > you are refering to (only restrictions on changing the 'role'
> of an 'admin'
> > or 'owner'). Could you please point it out to me.
> >
> >
> >
> >>  9.4 does contradict this (unless you get into the MU-Conference
> >>creator metalevel or Service Admin concepts)
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>
> >>  David
> >>
> >>On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 12:29:37PM +0100, Ian Paterson wrote:
> >>
> >>>The table in section 5.2.2 of JEP-45 "Changing Affiliations" appears to
> >>>suggest that it is not possible ("n/a") to change 'owner' or 'admin'
> >>>privileges to 'none' with a single request.
> >>>
> >>>However, section 9.4 seems to contradict this. It says: "An
> >>
> >>owner may want
> >>
> >>>to revoke a user's ownership privileges; this is done by
> >>
> >>changing the user's
> >>
> >>>affiliation to "admin" or lower (e.g., 'none')" Section 9.7
> >>
> >>says something
> >>
> >>>similar for Revoking Administrative Privileges. Examples 154 and 155
> >>>illustrate how to change a user's 'admin' privileges to 'none'.
> >>>
> >>>Is there any reason to prevent an admin or owner having all privileges
> >>>removed by another owner (affiliations='none')?
> >>>
> >>>- Ian
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Standards-JIG mailing list
> >>>Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> >>>https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/standards-jig
> >>
> >>--
> >>David Sutton
> >>Email: dsutton at legend.co.uk
> >>Jabber: peregrine at legend.net.uk
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Standards-JIG mailing list
> >>Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> >>https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/standards-jig
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Standards-JIG mailing list
> > Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> > https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/standards-jig
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/standards-jig

More information about the Standards mailing list