[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0186 (Invisible Command)

Mridul Muralidharan mridul at sun.com
Mon Sep 10 19:41:44 UTC 2007


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
>> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
>>>> Isn't this spec, for example, just special casing presence-out:deny ?
>>>>
>>>> "
>>>> <iq type='set' id='invisible'>
>>>> <query xmlns='jabber:iq:privacy'>
>>>>   <list name='invisible-all'>
>>>>     <item action='deny' order='1'>
>>>>       <presence-out/>
>>>>     </item>
>>>>   </list>
>>>> </query>
>>>> </iq>
>>>> "
>>> Yes it is. But then you need access to a server and client that support
>>> privacy lists. And you need to fiddle with your privacy lists all the
>>> time to add and subtract invisibility, which it seems to me introduces
>>> the possibility of messing up the definitions (not to mention the
>>> bandwidth usage). A small, focused command seems more useful to me.
>> In our client for example, there is a 'invisible to all' list which just
>> does the above - invisibility actually gets shown in the ui as though it
>> was a presence status.
> 
> When the user chooses "invisible to all", does that overrride all the
> other rules already defined (e.g., don't allow any communications with
> UserX)? I think that in order to do this right, you'd need to modify the
> active rule to now include invisibility, not define a standalone rule
> for it.
> 
> Peter
> 

Just changes the active list entirely, not edit the current list - that 
would be too cumbersome.

- Mridul



More information about the Standards mailing list