[Standards-JIG] Roster Subscription Synchronisation
trejkaz at xaoza.net
trejkaz at xaoza.net
Thu Sep 16 06:43:32 UTC 2004
At Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:45:53AM +0100, Richard Dobson wrote:
> It might be sheer luck but if all the legacy services work this way, which
> no one has yet tried to disprove then it is a perfectly logical thing to
> do, as far as I can see it if the contact is in the legacy roster at all
> the subscription will be something other than "none", and will only become
> a subscription of "none" when it is somehow removed from that legacy roster
> as well as no longer being subscribed by the other side, so you might as
> well then use this as a way of cleaning out the possible "ghost" contacts,
> I would think even for normal jabber users clients should really be
> prompting if they arnt already when a contact goes to "none" if they want
> it removed, since it is of no real use to them anymore at this point, even
> "to" status contacts should probably be being hidden from the main contact
> display by default and either shown on request or shown in a way similar to
> how msn shows its allowed list.
So what are you saying? That I'm not _allowed_ to transport Jabber to Jabber,
and get the convenience of roster synchronisation between my host Jabber
server and the remote Jabber server?
> Yes this is the ideal solution that a server based sync system does all
> this stuff all automatically for the user once they have authorised it to
> do so, but the people involved with this spec want something now and do not
> want to wait for what even they admit is the better approach of a server
> based solution.
We agree here, at least.
The way I see it right now, even if it were implemented as a client thing, the
wait won't go away. Whereas the bleeding edge clients will get the fix quite
soon, users on the clients who aren't so daring will still have to wait forever
to get the feature, and those users will continue to complain about the same
problem until every client in existence has implemented the change.
If it were done purely on the server side, only a few servers would need extra
code (along with the transports, naturally,) and it should have a greater
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza <trejkaz at xaoza.net>
Web site: http://xaoza.net/trejkaz/
Jabber ID: trejkaz at jabber.xaoza.net
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Standards