On 08/02/11 15:38, mikhail.zabal...@nokia.com wrote:
Why? service.example.com should be as valid a JID as any other, no?
Yes.
I think the rationale is to avoid confusing errors for users who enter
"foo.bar", expecting to talk to "foo....@gmail.com", or add them to
their roster.
I notice that Empathy just silently ignores the failing channel request,
though. Excitingly, Gabble doesn't seem to emit a failed delivery report
if I try to send messages to "l...@lol.whut", despite receiving an error
on the wire, because Prosody doesn't include the <body/> element we
tried to send in the error it sends back. (A send error/delivery report
is emitted when I try this via ejabberd, which includes <body/>.) I've
filed <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34039> for this isue.
I wonder whether the rationale is basically wrong, and we should allow
it, and ensure that we report errors properly and possibly include hints
in the UI as to what contact IDs should look like on each network. (For
instance, if the CM says something like “domain not found”, hint “did
you mean lol.w...@gmail.com?”.)
Either that, or we want a way—Addressing? ;-)—to explicitly label “this
is a server-like JID”.
Ta,
--
Will
_______________________________________________
telepathy mailing list
telepathy@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
