[Standards] Entity Capabilities Woes

Chris Mullins chris.mullins at coversant.net
Wed Mar 14 18:05:13 UTC 2007


Ryan Wrote:
[A Prefix Table]

> Given the length of the debate, and the simplicity of this 
> solution, I feel I may I'm missing something....

I've implemented the existing caps protocol, and I feel the same way.
What's there today works, but just feels a bit overly complicated and it
certainly takes up more bandwidth than it needs to. Every time a client
starts "for the first time", it sucks up a large amount of bandwidth.

Now, for example, on my Smartphone, I reboot the damn thing every day.
This means any caching that was done is likely to be gone. Given that
bandwidth on mobile devices is expensive, and my roster is pretty big,
this isn't a great solution. 

I like the simple case as opposed to what we have now. I also like
"rollups" so that if a client saw:
	<ext='basic'/>

It would (internally) turn this into:
	<ext='xhtml muc pep avatar'/> 

If the list of clients is as rich as Remko pointed out, then this is
probably a dead argument. On the other hand, I know our old SoapBox
client, which was based on Pandion, would put caps in the presence
stanzas, but it was in no way compliant with the XEP. 

(Our new client, now, is doing things mostly right. We also list custom
features in there, and have many more to come.)

--
Chris Mullins



More information about the Standards mailing list