Re: [Standards] XEP-0108: registry?

Daniel Noll wrote: Daniel Noll wrote: doesn't really matter to me. They're all phones. If I'm on an audio call, I might be able to IM with you in the background without the other person knowing. But I can't very well get away with that on a video call. So I think the distinction provides

[Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Getting a User's Attention

The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. Title: Getting a User's Attention Abstract: This document defines an XMPP protocol extension for getting a user's attention. URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/attention.html The XMPP Council will decide within 7 days

[Standards] XEP-0115 is harmful and should be deferred

Dnia 04-07-2007, śro o godzinie 21:03 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): base64(sha1(dave-formatted id/features)) Seems reasonable to me. I've picked this random post to reply but it does not concern this particular post but the whole thread... ...which I did not follow really, because I

[Standards] private storage revisited

We still need to figure out private storage via pubsub. Joe Hildebrand proposed that we tack +private on the end of the namespace (NodeID): http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2007-March/014758.html Rephrasing and generalizing his email based on subsequent list discussion, I would present

Re: [Standards] 'from' address on roster push

Dnia 27-06-2007, śro o godzinie 16:50 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): So I propose the following text: A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster set, and MUST treat any roster set as applying to the sender. A server MUST NOT include a 'from' address on a roster push.

Re: [Standards] XEP-0115 is harmful and should be deferred

Hi! On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:34:10PM +0200, Tomasz Sterna wrote: Dnia 04-07-2007, śro o godzinie 21:03 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): base64(sha1(dave-formatted id/features)) Seems reasonable to me. I've picked this random post to reply but it does not concern this particular

Re: [Standards] 'from' address on roster push

Tomasz Sterna wrote: Dnia 27-06-2007, śro o godzinie 16:50 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): So I propose the following text: A server MUST ignore any 'to' address on a roster set, and MUST treat any roster set as applying to the sender. A server MUST NOT include a 'from'

Re: [Standards] roster schema

Dnia 25-06-2007, pon o godzinie 09:52 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): If we say that the length SHOULD NOT be more than characters I would rather phrase it, that the client MAY NOT expect server to handle names longer than characters. If the server could handle and client knows

Re: [Standards] 'from' address on roster push

Tomasz Sterna wrote: Dnia 05-07-2007, czw o godzinie 16:31 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre napisał(a): Now, a 'from' address of the full JID seems odd to me. What if I send an IQ-set from one of my resources to another? Does that mean I can do roster pushes directly from one resource to another