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