[Standards] request for reviews: XEP-0045 v1.25rc5

Waqas Hussain waqas20 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 20 20:06:15 UTC 2011


On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Alexander Holler <holler at ahsoftware.de> wrote:
> Am 20.09.2011 00:46, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
>>
>> On 9/19/11 4:40 PM, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 19.09.2011 20:23, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre:
>>>>
>>>> On 9/6/11 10:38 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking again at XEP-0045,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see a reason why a request for voice should be handled in
>>>>> another way than a request for membership. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact I would suggest to replace both with an unified "request for
>>>>> affiliation" which should work like the request for membership in 7.10
>>>>> (with an attribute 'affiliation' and maybe a xmlns something other than
>>>>> 'jabber:iq:register').
>>>>
>>>> Is there a strong reason to change this now, other than protocol
>>>> hygiene?
>>>
>>> No, but maybe adding some muc-features which are making it obvious what
>>> is supported by the server is an option. I don't know if there is an
>>> implemention which supports e.g. those voice-requests as described,
>>> those I've tested seem not to have it implemented.
>>
>> If you test more implementations and find that none of them support the
>> feature (and the developers say they have no plans to implement the
>> feature), then it might make sense to remove the feature from the spec.
>
> Since sending a private messages to administrators is always possible (even
> without voice), I think there isn't really a need for this feature.

That's not true. PMs to room admins are not always possible. For
example, jabber at conference.jabber.org has PMs disabled for
non-moderators, and sending to admins doesn't work.

--
Waqas Hussain



More information about the Standards mailing list