[Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

Winfried Tilanus winfried at tilanus.com
Wed Mar 5 11:48:02 UTC 2014


On 05-03-14 11:46, Ralph Meijer wrote:

Hi,

>> could you elaborate on this proposal a little bit, please?
> Agreed. I'm a more of a fan of publish-subscribe than the next guy,
> but I don't see how this is a helpful suggestion without
> elaboration.

OK

>>> It would be so much easier to just allow 7.11 Getting the
>>> Memberlist also for the Entity Use Cases, so that an entity could
>>> just query a room for it's members (without having joined the
>>> room):
> Agreed. Reading the text there, I think MUC servers MAY actually
> support that. It doesn't explicitly limit it to occupants or admins.

Well, I *assumed* your MUC implementation did not support this.

Assuming that, you can try to change your MUC implementation (leaving
alone the question if a change to XEP-0045 is needed). But when you have
to change your MUC implementation, you may consider to hook into the
pubsub infrastructure: that infrastructure leaves much more room for
creating data nodes for providing the data you need.

It is my experience that sticking to MUC too much for scenario's like
yours results in lots of code that consists of workarounds around the
MUC protocol (or its implementations). I wished I asked myself the
question if MUC is really the right tool for my job long before. In my
case it may have been better to use something more flexible like pubsub
or even creating my own component.

So without diving into the implementation, I wanted to pose the general
question whether you have the right tools at hand for your job: MUC
works great, but only in quite straightforward use cases.

Winfried



More information about the Standards mailing list