[Standards] DRAFT: XEP-0319 (Last User Interaction in Presence)

Christian Schudt christian.schudt at gmx.de
Wed Apr 15 12:18:30 UTC 2015


Hi Tobias,

 
@XML Schema: I think the "since" attribute should be xs:dateTime, like in:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0203.html#schema
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0145.html#schema
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#schemas-muc
 
and probably most other XEP which deals with date/time.

On the other hand I saw that XEP-0202 uses xs:string, too. (probably a mistake)

Otherwise looks good.
 
What about my point 1 (The correlation to XEP-0012 4. Online User Query)?

And a last note: Some protocols (XEP-0202, XEP-0203) explicitly state, that the date/time used must be expressed in UTC. I don't know if you want that to be a requirement for XEP-0319, too. (I see no requirement for it, but I also don't see one for XEP-0203).

-- Christian
 
 

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2015 um 13:42 Uhr
Von: "Tobias Markmann" <tmarkmann at googlemail.com>
An: "XMPP Standards" <standards at xmpp.org>
Betreff: Re: [Standards] DRAFT: XEP-0319 (Last User Interaction in Presence)

Hi Christian, hi Kim,
 
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Kim Alvefur <zash at zash.se> wrote:On 2015-04-09 21:54, Christian Schudt wrote:
> 2. XEP-0256 should be updated (Appendix A): „superseded by XEP-0319“. Or will it become deprecated or what happens with it?

Does superseding happen at Draft or Final?
 
This does not seem to be defined in XEP-0001. At least I did not find anything specific about when it is supposed to happen. 
 
> 3. XML Schema is missing.

Indeed.
 
I've just added the XML Schema. Feel free to review: https://gitorious.org/xmpp/xmpp/commit/ad8bc9066902a6e56112b60eb8bb5f5b9b4b3572[https://gitorious.org/xmpp/xmpp/commit/ad8bc9066902a6e56112b60eb8bb5f5b9b4b3572]
 
> 4. „Determing Support“ is missing. I am not sure, if it’s necessary at all (because there’s no real interaction), but most other XEP’s have this.

I don't think this protocol needs this.  Entities that receive the
extension and don't understand it MUST ignore it.
 
Completely agree here. I can not think of an UX or protocol issue that would be solved by knowing the other party supports this XEP or not before actually receiving an idle-annotated stanza.
 
Cheers,
Tobias



More information about the Standards mailing list