[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0181 (Jingle DTMF)

Paul Witty paulrw at codian.com
Wed Apr 23 13:23:43 UTC 2008


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Paul Witty wrote:
>   
>> If a button-down action is followed by a button-up
>> action with a different set of parameters, it is not clear which ones we
>> should use.  The addition of duration also confuses
>> matters if a message is received with a duration of e.g. 1000ms, and
>> then 50ms later there is a button-up action.
>>     
>
> Does it even make sense to include button-up? Everything can probably be
> handled with button-down and durations.
>
>
>   
Indeed, it seems that having both the real-time button up/down and 
duration methods of recreating timings is unnecessary.  I quite like the 
up/down approach, because it means you can be more responsive (taking 
actions on button down instead of up, rotating through letters on screen 
by holding down the number if using DTMF to do alphanumeric entry).  
Except that the nature of TCP makes no guarantee about the timing of the 
messages, so our recreation of the DTMF may be incorrect.  Also, if the 
Jingle client runs on a PC, chances are that DTMF events will be created 
by single button clicks, and so not support varied durations.

So I'd have no objections to getting rid of button-up events, and just 
making DTMF message have the compulsory parameter 'code' , and optional 
'volume' and 'duration' properties, with sensible well-defined defaults 
if not present (100ms duration, I don't have any opinion about volume, 
as I wouldn't be using it).

-- 

Paul




More information about the Standards mailing list