[Standards] XEP-0126 invisibility interpretation

Mickaël Rémond mickael.remond at process-one.net
Tue Feb 13 22:11:47 UTC 2007


Hello,

How should be interpret the various repetition of this sentence in  
XEP 126:

In order to ensure synchronization of presence notifications, the  
client SHOULD now re-send the user's presence for broadcasting to all  
contacts, which the active rule will block to all but those JIDs with  
the specified subscription type:

In my understanding of privacy list, the best behaviour is that when  
you become invisible, to let the server send the unavailable presence  
packet (I think the invisible deprecated JEP, base on presence type  
invisible).

If I understand this well, the client should retrieve the privacy  
list, match it against the rosters contacts and send an unavailable  
to all contact that match, before setting the privacy list and them  
resynchronizing by sending another presence packet (available).
Is it what is expected from the client ?
Should the server send an unavailable packet in behalf of the client  
in case the client does not do it ?

-- 
Mickaël Rémond
  http://www.process-one.net/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070213/4d38e0dd/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list