[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0276 (Presence Decloaking)

Ralph Meijer ralphm at ik.nu
Wed Jul 18 19:31:42 UTC 2012

On 2012-07-17 11:39, Kevin Smith wrote:
> Right, I had assumed that. However, I'm not sure the protocol and the
> UI tie in as closely as might first appear (given that a malicious
> entity would just pick the session type most likely to be accepted).
> That is: The UI could say"Alice wants to start a conversation with you
> - this will reveal that you're online. [Reveal] [Ignore]" or whatever.
> Including a machine-readable indication of what's going to happen
> afterwards seems appealing - but ultimately I'm not sure that it helps
> (and it introduces additional complexity and need for extensibility
> and ...).

If I understand your argument correctly, the reason for decloaking would 
not be rendered by a client. Do we then actually need the element at all?

One argument in favor of identifiers for reasons v.s. just some text is 
localization. In that case I'd go with Kim's proposal.


More information about the Standards mailing list