On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 17:58 +0100, Simon Tennant (Buddycloud) wrote: > On 09/11/2009 17:42, Ralph Meijer wrote: > > If you equate 'editor' to the publisher affilation. CmdrTaco would > > simply change Hemos' affilation to none or even outcast. > > > What happens when Hemos does this to CmdrTaco first, thus depriving him > of the Slashdot node that he setup and owns (from a biz point of view)?
I'm not sure if I know the intimate details of the /. personnel, but if CmdrTaco has the owner affiliation and Hemos has the publisher affiliation, the latter has no privilege to change any affiliations, including that of CmdrTaco. What I think you might be getting at is: what happens when both are owner, as I suggested in my earlier mail. Well, it appears to not be clearly specified in XEP-0060 what owners can do to other owners. The only affiliation change for owners appears to be resignation. Nevertheless, local policy may define additional access control limits and/or privileges. E.g. a site-wide super admin might exist. Some MUC implementations have a similar role, which cannot be configured with standard and/or in-band protocol. The point I am trying to make is that I'm not sure if we should define additional affiliations at this point. I think the actual use-cases are limited, and might better be solved by out-of-band procedures, including angry phone calls to a site's systems administration. Also, I am wondering about compatibility issues for clients, that may not recognize the new affiliation. ralphm
