[Standards] XEP-107 and XEP-108: Empty Value?

Stephan Maka stephan at spaceboyz.net
Tue May 6 20:18:37 UTC 2008


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> On 05/04/2008 6:30 PM, Florian Zeitz wrote:
> > My proposed solution:
> > What XEP-0163 (PEP) does require is node deletion. For some reason no
> > implementation I know off does support this, but IMHO it is actually the
> > way to go.
> > PEP has the concept of one node per namespace, so to retract information
> > from a certain PEP extension you just have to delete the node with it's
> > namespace as name.

Or have a consistant item/@id naming scheme.

> > This has two benefits.
> > 1. Theoretically every implementation supports it as it is required by
> > XEP-0163.
> > 2. You don't have to specify notify="1" to make it work, as is the case
> > for <retract/> (Well maybe not really a benefit but something I stumbled
> > over ;) )

Ah, sounds good.

> Hmm. We didn't think about this case enough when we defined all these
> personal eventing payloads.
> 
> IMHO, for personal eventing there is a difference between (1) deleting
> an event and (2) setting your state back to neutral. #1 rewrites history
> by effectively saying "well no I didn't have that last mood, please
> ignore it" whereas #2 says "yeah I was angry before but now I'm not". If
> we use personal eventing payloads as input to lifestreaming systems then
> I think we want to preserve the history but define neutral states for
> all of these.

Interesting, would you put this into the next version of XEP-0163? We
might not be the last to wonder about this.


Stephan



More information about the Standards mailing list