[Standards] XEP-0301 Fallback Mechanism of Determining Support (Accessibility)

Gunnar Hellström gunnar.hellstrom at omnitor.se
Wed Jul 11 21:44:21 UTC 2012

On 2012-07-11 22:27, Dave Cridland wrote:
> OK, so, loosely:
> 1) If you know the remote disco (via caps, typically, or by a previous 
> query), then you can follow that. Sending protocol to a remote 
> endpoint that you *know* cannot support it is not going to make people 
> happy. This will cover anyone in your roster, and indeed almost anyone 
> you know to be online.
> 2) If you do not know the remote disco, then sending an "exploratory" 
> <rtt/>, as in XEP-0085, seems reasonable, in the first message (only) 
> in a conversation. This would most certainly include emergency services.
> 3) If, on the other hand, you're responding to a message - that is, 
> your first message is a reply to another - then you'd only use <rtt/> 
> if the contact does.
> There is one edge case - where the contact does not advertise RTT, yet 
> is sending it to you. In this case, you print out every XEP, roll them 
> up, track down the implementor, and whack them over the head.
Sounds good.
Can you convert your conclusion to modification proposals for chapter 5 
and 6.2?


More information about the Standards mailing list