[Standards] pubsub/pep auto-creation

Rachel Blackman rcb at ceruleanstudios.com
Thu Mar 22 17:04:54 UTC 2007

>>> The convincing argument [for publish+configure] should be the  
>>> fact that
>>> [without it] you can never assume on a publish that you are  
>>> publishing an
>>> item the way you want it, unless you check configuration. And even
>>> checking doesn't guarantee you that your item will be published  
>>> privately
>>> if some other resource is posting public events to it.
>> Yes, this argument seems very convincing.
>> +1 publish+configure for PEP
> But as I just mentioned in the jdev room, publish+configure doesn't  
> give you per-item ACLs, it gives you publish plus (perhaps) toggle  
> the node configuration, which is quite different.

I don't think we need ACLs, necessarily.  Just that if we have the  
ability to toggle between 'public' and 'private' nodes, we should  
darn well be able to do so in the same stanza that we push data to  
it.  I.e., I'm not sure that the configuration is *insufficient* as  
it stands, just that we should be able to include what configuration  
we already have in the same stanza as a publish.

It's getting silly that 'it would be nice to reduce the flow of PEP  
stanzas for checking errors' has turned into ACLs and 'maybe we  
should throw PEP out entirely.'

> I think we need a MUC meeting about this. :)

Honestly, I don't.  If people want ACLs in PEP, that's an entirely  
different discussion; it isn't this one. ;)

But right now, PEP is (as I understand it) intended to basically give  
people a way to publish things and only send to those who care about  
it, rather than just stuffing everything into presence stanzas and  
blasting it out to the world.  ACLs seem to me to be overkill there;  
I don't really care whether Fred /and/ Bob can see my user tune data,  
for instance.

(Yes, I know geoloc and physical location and so on, you might want  
ACLs on.  I'd argue that in that case, you can actually go use full  
pubsub; PEP is intended to solve only the simple cases.  ACLs may be  
useful in some cases, but I don't think they're /required/...  
especially since trying to manage who can see what bits of your  
presence data is another one of those things that will create huge  
client headaches to design UI for.)

I'll point out that iChat has evidently given up and DOES just stuff  
PEP-based XEPs into their presence stanzas (for instance, User Tune  
is embedded right there in at least a few iChat presence stanzas I've  
seen lately, perhaps from the Leopard iChat).  If we don't get PEP up  
and running after this long, I'm pretty sure that eventually other  
client devs will just throw in the towel and follow iChat's lead on  
this one.

Rachel Blackman <rcb at ceruleanstudios.com>
Trillian Messenger - http://www.trillianastra.com/

More information about the Standards mailing list