Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
A question: should this clientinfo extension include the software name,
or do we assume that is provided properly in the service discovery
identity? If the latter, I'll make that clear in the extension spec. (It
seems preferable to have the same information in only one place!)
BTW I think it is unclear (at least for some people) what should be
given as a 'name' in <identity category='client' type='pc'/>. I don't
remember the details, but some time ago people complained that Psi puts
'Psi' as a name, not user's nick. So if we want to read client's name
from <identity/> element, it should be noted (maybe in disco registry)
what the name should be.
And now about the original question: We could have optional field which
- if present - would override client/pc identity name.
Also for implementation notes: if we continue reading client name from
<identity/>, there should be probably a reminder that there may be
multiple <identity/> elements, but we are only interested in client/pc
here (and this may be not always the first element)
--
Maciek A: It's against natural order of reading.
xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Q: Why is that?
A: People answering above quoted text.
Q: What's the most annoying on newsgroups?
