[Standards] XEP-0126 invisibility interpretation

Mickaël Rémond mickael.remond at process-one.net
Wed Feb 14 21:01:23 UTC 2007


Hello,

Le 13 févr. 07 à 23:17, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :

> Maybe we can take some time at FOSDEM / DevCon to discuss XEP-0186. :)

Yes, very good idea.

I am not totally sure that invisibility is a misuse of privacy list.  
The good thing, that I do not see addressed here is being visible for  
some people and invisible for others.

Yes, I have seen that directed presence are delivered. That's client  
side behaviour and one thing that might be hard to manage is the case  
when new contact become available. They probe you and will see you  
offline, but if in your client side policy they were supposed to see  
you, the client must react to their available presence by sending a  
directed presence.

What I am trying akwardly to say here, is that from the client point  
of view, it is not 'fire your presence packets and forget', but  
rather, keep track of all your contact presence and react accordingly.

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070214/194cb26e/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list