[Standards] hierarchical MUC permissions

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Fri Oct 15 17:31:21 UTC 2010


On Fri Oct 15 18:11:55 2010, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Friday 15 October 2010 00:54:30 Dave Cridland wrote:
> > I'd be inclined to stick with this pattern, too - add domain-level
> > affiliations in a more general way, include them in protocol (we
> > currently use a magic room in MUC), and not try to expose them  
> (very
> > much) in the affiliation lists of the node/rooms.
> 
> Okay, so setting affiliations with scopes.  Maybe to handle domain  
> scope you'd
> just do the same admin protocol exchanges against the MUC domain  
> JID instead
> of a room JID?
> 
> 
Yes, could do. I'd leave the virtual room as a control, though, it's  
nice for compat.

> I agree that in general it would be confusing to differentiate  
> admins of
> different scopes in a client UI, but we have this need, so I'd like  
> for it to
> be possible.  What about this:
> 
> <presence from="room at conference.example.com/user_nick">
>   <x xmlns="http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#user">
>     <item affiliation="admin" scope="domain" role="moderator"/>
>   </x>
> </presence>

Can do - obviously you need an extension element in the muc join  
element.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade



More information about the Standards mailing list