Am Fr, 2003-11-28 um 15.47 schrieb Richard Dobson: > > Well... (was at lunch). > > Ok > > > The thought was, the protocol defines administration in p2p, for some > > reasons ... i.e. ban/kick, a client does not necessarily have to follow > > these specs, i can silently ignore a ban/kick. > > Ah yes the client could ignore someone (quite a good idea), but whoever is > the op/admin could also have the ability to kick someone from the chat > entirely. > > > i pulled in an existing example, the same goes for the 'invisible' > > presence, to show that a p2p spec won't lead anywhere beside sharing > > streams. That really is my opinion on this. > > if a client doesn't implement presence inv. an inv user still is > > online... > > Not sure what you mean here, can you explain a little more?
Ok, what i mean is this: The 'invisible' presence in jabber is a perfect example for a spec which can be omitted. I user may feel happy that he is invisible, but in fact he only thinks he is invisible, because some people still see him online, but as 'invisible'. that as a fundament, i mean that p2p functions are much easier to walk around (i.e. ban - a user can silently ignore the ban ....) cya tomorrow. ulrich _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
