[Standards] [Fwd: [Council] meeting minutes, 2007-05-16]

Ian Paterson ian.paterson at clientside.co.uk
Tue May 29 15:39:43 UTC 2007


Dave Cridland wrote:
> I see no technical advantage in changing [resources] to a random string.

Well, how about the advantage that random resources seem to be the only 
feasable way to avoid presence leaks? (see previous posts)

> dwd at jabber.org/Office always goes to my desktop computer

An increasing number of servers offer PEP. So exactly the same 
functionality (from the user perspective) can be implemented as defined 
in XEP-0080:

<geoloc xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/geoloc'>
  <description>Office</description>
</geoloc>


IMHO resource identifiers should only be used for what they were 
designed for (overloading is bad).

Admittedly RFC 3920 does not specifically say, "A resource identifier 
MUST NOT be used as an undefined publishing channel between users" 
(perhaps it should?). However it does say, "A resource identifier is 
opaque to both servers and other clients". Several clients (IMHO 
correctly) take that to mean "opaque to others, period". They therefore 
generate a random resource and they don't display other clients' 
resources to the user.

The result is that those clients that assume other clients' resource 
strings are overloaded with a non-opaque meaning are currently 
displaying random strings to their users! It also means they mislead 
their users when they imply that the resource strings their users type 
will be seen by their users' contacts.

Users will have a better experience once their clients follow the 
standards (geoloc etc). Let's work towards the widespread adoption of 
PEP/geoloc and fix this issue once and for all.

- Ian




More information about the Standards mailing list