On 8 Feb 2017, at 15:16, Sam Whited <s...@samwhited.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Steve Kille <steve.ki...@isode.com> wrote: >> 9. It is agreed that MIX Channels will be represented in the roster. >> >> >> 10. It is intended to mark MIX clients in the roster with a server >> generated annotation, so that MIX clients can clearly show MIX channels >> without needing to do discos. These clients will be marked offline, so >> should not be unduly obtrusive to non-MIX clients. > > There was some discussion in the MUC recently about how roster > requests are actually IQs and theoretically other entities besides the > server could maintain a roster (which you could request from them by > sending an IQ exactly like you would to the server for your main > roster). I hadn't considered this when we were discussing it at the > summit, but maybe it makes sense for the MIX service to maintain its > own roster of MIX channels / proxy JIDs? The users client would > request it from the MIX service and could show it separately or merge > it as needed. Clients that don't support MIX obviously would not > request this roster from the MIX server. > > At first glance this feels cleaner to me than having the MIX service > modify the users main roster, but I'm sure that I haven't thought it > all the way through and there are consequences to this approach too?
Different use case, I’m afraid. Remote rosters don’t get to do broadcast presence. /K _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
