[Standards] Message Mine'ing

Dirk Meyer dmeyer at tzi.de
Tue Dec 2 19:41:19 UTC 2008

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> ejabberd already does this if there is more than one resource with the
>> highest prio. If you have for example two resources with prio 50 and one
>> with prio 30, both with prio 50 will receive messages to the bare JID.
> Most servers do that. What I'm suggesting is more of the Google Talk
> behavior -- a message sent to the bare JID gets sent to *all* resources
> regardless of priority. That is, priority is ignored and maybe even
> deprecated.

First of all, we need some sort of negative priority for bots. IMHO it
maes no sense to send a message to a device that can not answer. That
said, I have a scenario were you may want priorities: I have my mobile
phone is my pocket and when I get a message, it makes a small
noise. When working at my laptop, I do not want the phone to react on
new messages at all. The phone has prio 30 and my laptop 50. If I go
away and auto away kicks in, the laptop will be 20 and the phone gets
the messages. On the other hand, if a message arives at my laptop and I
just left the room (auto away has not kicked in yet), I want to know
about that message. I like the idea from Dave:

 The "Hey, I have pending messages here!" one. (ie, a bare_jid-wide
 version of the flashing taskbar item thingy.)

My laptop receives the message and tries to notify me. After a user
defined timeout the laptop sends the "Hey, I have pending messages
here!" message to my mobile phone and the phones makes noise. When I
look at the phone, the phones says "Give me the pending message" to my

Does this scenario make sense?


	A programming language named after a man who would turn over
	in his grave if he knew about it.
		-- Datamation, January 15, 1984

More information about the Standards mailing list