[Standards-JIG] User display extended presence

Bart van Bragt jabber at vanbragt.com
Thu Mar 17 14:19:48 UTC 2005

Jean-Louis Seguineau wrote:
> This is a respectable opinion. But my listening to customer request tells me
> otherwise... The enterprise has different requirements than 'public' IMs,
> which you seems to refer to. And, we like it or not, in the enterprise, we
> are bound to see MSFT around for some more time. Their LCS server does not
> provide a vCard access but sends a display name in the presence.
So it looks like we had quite a different thing in mind in this 
discussion :) I was looking at it from a general enduser perspective 
(which is where my interests are), you are looking at it from an 
enterprise perspective. Two quite different things.

Maybe it's a smart idea to set up some use cases so it's clear what we 
want to achieve. If the user (aunt tilly again :D) says that she wants 
her nickname to change on my roster the moment she changes it then we 
could ofcourse give her that. But IMO (in this the Aunt Tilly case 
anyway) she doesn't want to instantly change her nickname, she wants to 
convey status information. She wants to keep the people in her roster up 
to date with what's happening with her at that moment. IMO that's 
something quite different from instantly changing your nickname.

Same thing with an IT department that wants to mandate all or a part of 
the nicknames. I'm not sure if using pubsub nicknames is the solution to 
that. Why not solve this on the server? Tell the server that people are 
not allowed to change the names in their roster. That would solve your 
problem (at least in this case) and it wouldn't require yet another JEP.

It's very easy to 'solve' a problem with a JEP but if no-one uses that 
JEP, if no-one implements it you are just confusing newcomers to the 
XMPP world even more. We already have way too many JEPs and too little 

But don't get me wrong. Creating new JEPs really isn't evil. But IMO 
it's smart to first see if it's possible to solve these issues with the 
protocols and software that is already there before adding yet another 
JEP to the soup :)

BTW thanks for the links, do you know where the privacy related 
documents are approximately? Most of the sites focusses on technical 
issues and the search didn't help that much either.


More information about the Standards mailing list