[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Metacontacts
melo at simplicidade.org
Tue Mar 27 11:23:44 UTC 2007
On Mar 27, 2007, at 11:49 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2007, at 11:31, Pedro Melo wrote:
>> I wonder how do the authors think about naming this meta-contact.
>> I would think that a
> Well, what we decided was that it made sense to name the meta-
> contact the same way you would name the highest-order member,
> perhaps an implementation note is in order here. Since these things
> span multiple accounts, and we don't require all accounts to be
> online all the time, it would be a bit messy to try and control
> things like name across multiple accounts, some of which might be
> missing, and it duplicates the information we already have in the
> roster/vcard etc
But the highest order member is not know unless all accounts are online.
Given that you want to make the protocol resilient, shouldn't we
store the name and groups in all account jabber:iq:private?
I mean, if you use the highest order member and you only have a
partial view of your accounts, you might end up with a contact that
changes group and name every time one of your accounts goes online
Also: how do you plan to take in account the <show> element? Do you
keep the order per 'show' value?
We struggle with some of this with our client. We support meta-
contacts (our protocol uses only information available in the roster)
for quite some time now, but we are trying to improve the reaction to
Jabber ID: melo at simplicidade.org
More information about the Standards