No one ever said that JEP-0022 made sense. :) Personally I think we need to have a serious discussion about JEP-0022 vs. JEP-0085 and get this composing notification stuff finalized. Expect me to push the issue with the next Council. But frank discussion on this list or standards-jig would be good.
Peter On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 04:52:48PM -0400, Daniel Chote wrote: > Im kinda curious about the message type usage in JEP0022. In the jep > the examples messages are sent with no type attribute... > Even tho the type attribute in a message packet isnt really that > important, and really only holds UI style relevance, there is a certain > level of relativity you should keep. For instance... if I am holding a > conversation with someone, who also supports jabber:x:events, and the > messages that are going back and forward between the two users have > attrib type="chat" in them, shouldnt the events hold the same attribute > type="chat"? The argument that would go against this is of course the > fact that messages without a body shouldnt be sent with a type... but > thats where i disagree, because if that was the case... then the > attribute type would hold a little more importance than just a UI > aspect, would it not? > > wouldnt it be cleaner, to structure event packets around the same base > of the message packets that you are sending around them? I mean, for > clients that support threads, they all keep the thread information in > tact, why should this be any different for the parent node of the packet? > > I dunno, it doesnt really make much sense to me. > -- > Daniel Chote > Developer/Designer and typical drunk! > email/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > blog: http://daniel.chote.com > website: http://www.chote.com _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
