[Standards] Decloaking and Temporary Subscriptions
dave at cridland.net
Thu Jan 21 10:51:50 UTC 2010
On Thu Jan 21 05:45:27 2010, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Well, your server could send those interim presence changes right
> because that's allowed but not required by RFC 3921 (IIRC). This is
> something we might want to take up in the XMPP WG.
It can? I believe a broadcast presence change is sent only to roster
contacts, and moreover this is actually relied upon by some clients.
> Doing this via <message/> instead of <presence/>, and using message
> mine-ing or a similar technology to retract the decloak requests
> were delivered to the other resources, would at least enable the
> clients to remove those popups at the other resources. Rob and I had
> some discussions about <message/> vs. <presence/> for decloaking
> and I
> think it's worth it to continue that discussion.
Yes, but again, mime-ing requires all clients *and* the server for a
user to play the same game, plus it throws away priority entirely.
We have a facility already for clients requesting access to another
parties presence that does all this - it's called a subscription.
I suppose I've yet to put my finger on what's fundamentally so
different about decloaking that it needs a wholly different mechanism
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
More information about the Standards