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

Adam Nemeth aadaam at gmail.com
Tue May 29 19:21:32 UTC 2007


On 5/29/07, Mridul Muralidharan <mridul at sun.com> wrote:

> >
> > Here are my cases in a first thought:
> >     - Capabilities (for voice, for certain XEP-support) - these can be
> > taken to be granted
> Use caps & rap (xep 168) ?
> >     - Talking to my 'stayed-at-home' identity (my desktop computer from
> > my mobile, for reading mails, messages, etc)
> You mean me at domain/res1 talking to me at domain/res2 ? Like bots using jid
> ? Can it not use Service discover extension (128) or caps ?
> Most possibly I did not get the usecase here.

Remote command? (XEP-0146)

> >     - Message has higher / lower priority than normal (=> send a funny
> > link to my desktop, because it isn't as important, even when mobile is
> > higher priority currently; send an alert to my cellphone, because it
> > beeps, even it has less priority for comfort reasons)
> >
> caps/rap again ?

Introducing a capability for less important and more important messages?:)

I think of simple IM messages, like when you use the mobile number
even if you know the other is most possibly at home. "Hi, John, read
this link when you'll be at home" - I just simply want to send it to a
specific resource - a well-known one.

(I don't know what a world with always-on presence would be; we know
what does it mean to have a cellphone and a wired phone at home, but
don't know what would happen if the same is for IM client (being SIP
or XMPP, both use such approach.)
> But these are very specific and possibly contrived usecases just to
> bring out a usecase for resource.
> My point is, just because I have "me at domain/mobile" does not mean I am
> on a mobile ... it will be better to query the resource to find out if
> it really is a mobile.

It's a kind of a session-constant presence probably.
> If the user already knows that a specific full jid corresponds to a
> session, that is a different case - and possibly the only valid one imo.
> In most other cases, alternatives to using resource to convey meaning
> makes more sense since it is authoritative and declared information :
> while using resource is relying on potentially ambiguous data.
> Though, as Justin mentioned, resources have been around for ages - and
> so users have unfortunately become familiar with it to the point of
> associated meaning with it.
> Regards,
> Mridul
> >

Aadaam <aadaam at gmail.com>

More information about the Standards mailing list