[Standards-JIG] Behaviour when sending a message to a negativepriority resource

Nolan Eakins sneakin at semanticgap.com
Sun Sep 24 02:07:45 UTC 2006


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2006, at 10:09 AM, Nolan Eakins wrote:
>> Joe Hildebrand wrote:
>>> So, there's a bot and a user at the same bare jid, with different
>>> resources?  That seems like a confusing approach.  If it's a presence
>>> probe of some kind, it shouldn't need to respond to messages.  If it's a
>>> normal-style bot, it should have its own identity.
>>
>> I can see such a situation popping up with a calendar app. I have it
>> bound to "me at semanticgap.com/calendar", but since I don't ever want any
>> chat messages going to it I place it with a negative priority. In such a
>> case, I'll still want it to receive updates contained in message stanzas
>> and possibly issue message based commands to it: "add 10:00 AM Meeting".
> 
> This is completely possible.  You can always direct a message a message
> to a resource, even if that resource is negative priority.  It's just
> not eligible for being "most available", when a message is sent to the
> bare jid.

I interpreted this thread as stating that NO messages should be sent to
resources with negative priorities. That's the idea I got from what JD
Conley stated about what was said at the interop event: clients should
not be able to send messages to resources with negative priorities.

Even your own comments tended towards that interpretation: a normal
style bot...should have its own identity.

I wanted to go on the record with a use case that would use a resource,
have negative priority, and require actual messages get sent to it. I
didn't want to see something dumb get mandated like "clients should not
be able to send messages to resources with negative priorities".

- - Nolan

- --
SemanticGap: To act as one (TM) -- http://www.semanticgap.com/
Instant awareness & messaging * Online presence design
Cross platform and agile development
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFFehvhuPszQVSPEARApe2AJ0RDLeowmR6jHZxL1l/MfIwEj6DVgCbBFjd
dSXSa9Avre4GXoLTiNdk8RU=
=Las1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: sneakin.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 207 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20060923/7a986fab/attachment.vcf>


More information about the Standards mailing list