On Saturday 14 June 2003 02:18 am, Timothy Carpenter wrote: > do that, I suggest we have each desktop run a small private SERVER that has > all the transports.
The problem is that the current Jabber transport software is notable for being much less featureful than the multi-IM clients out there. If you could make all of the transports super-featureful with file transfer and everything (which I guess is fine for local use) then you basically would end up with a multi-IM library that uses XMPP for IPC. My gut says this is overkill, but it would certainly work I guess. > The server can use s2s to connect to the 'proper' Jabber world (or even a Linking this embedded jabber server to the real world would not be possible, as far as I can tell. The client could simply maintain two Jabber connections (one to a real Jabber server, and optionally one to the local server). > Client designers can then focus on look-and-feel, skins, usability, > thinness and robustness and forget about having to handle multi-platform > issues which, frankly, each client is re-inventing the wheel in that > regard. They already do focus on these things. I don't think many clients out there are trying to do multi-IM, of which I can only name a handful. I think multi-IM clients help Jabber's world domination agenda, by allowing people to easily migrate. However, if _every_ client was multi-IM, I think we'd be putting too much emphasis on legacy systems. Would it be good if our super friendly client for end-users worked natively with AIM/ICQ/MSN/Yahoo? I'm not sure, but it is something to think about. Do we need a super portable embedded jabber server transport bundle thing? Probably not, regardless of the answer to the previous question. -Justin _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
