[Standards-JIG] Re: Re: LAST CALL: JEP-0172 (User Nickname)

Remko Troncon remko at el-tramo.be
Wed May 3 06:45:26 UTC 2006

> Could a client simply declare a nickname feature if they want them the old 
> way?  That way they're soliciting the information, and if they don't want it 
> they don't declare support for the feature.

What if a client chooses to support it for the 'sensible' use 
cases, yet refuses to implement the last one ? Should it announce the
feature ? Then again, the first sentence of Section 4 states that
the JEP is targeted towards 'initial communication', so for those
use cases disco doesn't work anyway.
What if the client supports the PEP version of nicknames ? Then it 
*has* to publish the feature, yet it is not interested in the messages.

> Whereas it's true that unsolicited messages are a bit annoying, and a waste of 
> bandwidth, in this kind of situation the unsolicited messages might actually 
> convince client authors to implement PEP

If you look at it from the sending side, yes: sending a message to each of
your contacts is insane, i wouldn't implement it. However, even though
you are a motivated client developer supporting PEP, all your users still
get the unsolicited information.


More information about the Standards mailing list