On 1/23/10 8:41 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 1/23/10 5:09 PM, Paul Aurich wrote: >> Should there ever be a circumstance under which the presence stanza >> for a room occupant contains two <x >> xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#user'/> children? > > No. > >> It's not explicitly spelled out in XEP-0045 one way or the other, but >> I can't think of a reason it should happen (since the spec says "If a >> MUC service receives such extended presence information from an >> occupant, it MUST NOT reflect it to other occupants.") >> >> My personal preference is to spell out explicitly that this SHOULD >> NOT occur (I'm also ok w/ MUST NOT :) ), as I can't see a valid >> reason for having multiple, and a client-side assurance that there >> won't be multiple simplifies code. > > I'm in favor of MUST NOT.
Fixed in my working copy.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
