Just now catching up... On 11/24/09 1:15 PM, Brian Cully wrote: > On 24-Nov-2009, at 15:08, Robin Collier wrote: >> I would assume that you are going to request with the latest version >> by virtue of the natural order of the version string, not by time. > > No, because there is no natural order to an opaque string. Instead, you > rely on the in-order delivery semantics of XMPP and go with the most > recently received stanza. In truth, it doesn't really matter what stanza > you pick, though, as long as you pick a version you've seen.
Right. This is exactly how we do things for roster versioning: when requesting the roster, you tell the server "this is the last version I know about" and it either (1) informs you that you're up to date or (2) sends you what's new. I don't (yet) see any strong reason to do things differently for pubsub. And, to be clear, in order to tell the server "this is the last version I know about" you don't need to tell the server "I last received an update from you at Time X" because I can just as easily tell the server "the last update I received from you was Version Y". The two are functionally equivalent as far as I can see. Now, people might want timestamps for other reasons, but so far we've thought that timestamps are better encapsulated in the payload than in the payload wrapper (<item/> element). Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
