Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Ralph Meijer
On 2014-03-05 12:48, Winfried Tilanus wrote: > [..] > 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 implement

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Christian Schudt
occupant. Christian Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 12:31 Uhr Von: "Peter Saint-Andre" An: "XMPP Standards" Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final? On 3/5/14, 11:25 AM, Christian Schudt wrote: > Hi, > >> Could you elaborate a bit on the use case and the nee

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Winfried Tilanus
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 allo

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 3/5/14, 11:25 AM, Christian Schudt wrote: Hi, Could you elaborate a bit on the use case and the need for it? I'm not saying it's bad or irrelevant, but XEP-0045 was not designed to solve every possible problem related to groupchat. A user creates a (members-only) room and adds X contacts f

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Christian Schudt
my webmail interface (GMX) does not allow for those ">" quotes (afaik). I did it manually now. Christian Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 11:35 Uhr Von: "Peter Saint-Andre" An: "XMPP Standards" Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final? :) A: Because it

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Ralph Meijer
On 2014-03-05 11:16, Christian Schudt 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. Going back to the original question, I don't

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
s about occupants who are already in the room.) Peter Christian Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 10:54 Uhr Von: "Winfried Tilanus" An: standards@xmpp.org Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final? On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote: Hi, I recently was confronted with

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Christian Schudt
ndards@xmpp.org Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final? On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote: Hi, > I recently was confronted with the following requirement: Create a > (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and > send an invitation to these X contacts. >

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-05 Thread Winfried Tilanus
On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote: Hi, > I recently was confronted with the following requirement: Create a > (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and > send an invitation to these X contacts. > > Then after receiving the invitation, but BEFORE joining the room,

Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-03-01 Thread Christian Schudt
Hi, I recently was confronted with the following requirement: Create a (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and send an invitation to these X contacts. Then after receiving the invitation, but BEFORE joining the room, the invitee should discover the members in the room

[Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?

2014-02-27 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
I would like to propose that we advance XEP-0045 to Final. The spec advanced to Draft in 2002, it is widely implemented, and it is quite stable. I plan to query the XMPP Council about issuing a Call for Experience (see XEP-0001) in its next meeting. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.