[Standards] Message Mine'ing

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Tue Dec 2 19:10:12 UTC 2008

Dave Cridland wrote:

> I'm wondering if we can split the issue, here, and instead have two
> mini-protocols:
> 1) The "Hey, I have pending messages here!" one. (ie, a bare_jid-wide
> version of the flashing taskbar item thingy.)
> I'm wondering if intra-jid presence can be made to do the first - so the
> clients would send a directed presence to their own bare jid which
> contained "private" status, including any pending messages.
> Assuming the intra-jid presence trick can be used, then servers need to
> do nothing. Otherwise, I'm tempted to suggest that we simply standardize
> that hack, and then we've a general method for doing similar things.

Presence, message, what difference does it make? I see no special reason
to use presence instead of message here, in fact it doesn't have
anything to do with presence so I'd prefer message.

Then the question is: does your proposal (which I don't grok, perhaps
you could post more details) cut out the server in a way that the MINE
stuff doesn't? Are you perhaps suggesting a generalized algorithm for
construction of a UUID for each message, so that the claiming client can
send a special message (or presence) to the other resources so that the
others know it has claimed the message?

I think I'm missing something here. Yes it would be nice if we didn't
need to change any servers to make this happen (just make it so that
they send bare-JID message to all resources), but it's not clear to me
how we can make that work.


Peter Saint-Andre

More information about the Standards mailing list