[Standards-JIG] Re: Re: Client Capabilities (rant)

Remko Troncon remko at psi-im.org
Mon Nov 21 22:53:38 UTC 2005

> Any optional features need to be identified as extensions. If my client
> allows me to turn XHTML On or Off, then I would need to list it in an
> extension. Same with File Transfers. I can come up with quite a few use cases
> where I would want to disable one or both of these features at a per-user
> level.

You're probably right. And even so, it's not very good to make assumptions
on this beforehand.

But still, doing the 'short name' thing also isn't very extendible, since it
potentially causes many name clashes. If you want to avoid this by using
namespaces, basically, you're going to send the complete disco#info information
in a presence packet, which (assuming you have all the various server
optimizations) isn't much better than just querying the disco#info request for
every contact on your list. So, if you don't want to implement caps, you might
want to do the naive discoing (which pbb isn't nice to clients, but still).

I also thought about doing the persistent caching, because that seems to make
a lot of sense, and can cut down on traffic even more.


More information about the Standards mailing list