Leif, I am sure Plasma is applicable to XMPP.
The question I am trying to answer in my mind is what is happing to the data. While there are a lot of similarities, they are not identical so we can to look at the expected behavior of the client wrt the data. While IM exchanges data I don’t see in current clients the commingling and reuse of data you get with email. That should be goodness for XMPP because the complications for email lie in this comingling and reuse. If you can write up a use case for non-store and forward as well as store and forward I can incorporate them into the requirements doc. Thanks Trevor -----Original Message----- From: Leif Johansson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 2:14 PM To: Trevor Freeman Cc: Peter Saint-Andre; [email protected] Subject: Re: [plasma] why not web portal mail? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/13/2011 07:08 PM, Trevor Freeman wrote: > Ok then I don’t get the use case. > > Can you describe when a user would do such a thing and what are they trying > to accomplish? OK I'll try to spell it out... The point I was trying to make is and was that the same requirements and UCs that apply to email apply equally well to XMPP. The fact that XMPP _has_ store-and-forward capabilities doesn't mean it is _exactly_ the same thing as email. I believe the difficulty of building web-only XMPP clients and the fact that plasma-like capabilities are probably equally useful for XMPP as for email is a response to Stephens question "Why not build a web-applications?". Cheers Leif -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk2mEjUACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZneNrACdG2X3BpzxwMIUKaA8E3SyTJ48 SccAn3kI1ThX3MisHpoRkoQC/x16yMi4 =G2Zh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ plasma mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma
