On Apr 30, 2012, at 11:02, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 4/30/12 9:45 AM, Dave Cridland wrote: >> On Mon Apr 30 17:17:12 2012, Daniel Dormont wrote: >>> I've been asked to add invisibility to my XMPP-based application. >> >> I think the "right" thing is to use XEP-0186, but that's seen very >> limited support on the server. >> >> I'm increasingly finding some interesting use-cases for invisibility, >> such as email clients that need to be presence aware - I don't see a >> need for confusing the contacts' roster by showing myself online when >> I'm not, as such. > > Isn't that presence with negative priority? >
Negative priority is potentially a hint to the UA not to display to the receiving user, but that requires the client to do the right thing and treat negative priority as offline/unavailable. Few clients (most likely none) do the right thing today. I believe it matters if that information is concerning or not. If not, then simple negative priority is probably fine. If it is, then negative priority + invisibility is necessary. - m&m Matthew A. Miller <http://goo.gl/LK55L>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ JDev mailing list Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
