On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 10:26 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Ralph Meijer wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:13 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> Ralph Meijer wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I am working on getting publish-subscribe collection nodes implemented > >>> in Idavoll. There are two ways to subscribe to a collection nodes using > >>> the 'pubsub#subscription_type' subscription configuration option: nodes > >>> and items. > >>> > >>> In the 'nodes' case, you get notifications when nodes get associated > >>> with the collection. However, we didn't define protocol for notifying > >>> subscribers of deassociation, and I would really like to have that. > >>> > >>> To propose new protocol for that, I'd like to know if there is anyone > >>> actually implementing this bit of the spec. > >> Ralph, it seems that you're the only one. :) > > > > Heh. That's nice! > > > >> Notification of a new node takes the following form: > >> > >> <message from='pubsub.shakespeare.lit' > >> to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > >> id='newnode1'> > >> <event xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub#event'> > >> <collection> > >> <node id='new-node-id'> > >> </collection> > >> </event> > >> </message> > >> > >> I suppose that notification of node disassociation might look like this: > >> > >> <message from='pubsub.shakespeare.lit' > >> to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > >> id='oldnode1'> > >> <event xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub#event'> > >> <collection> > >> <disassociate id='old-node-id'> > >> </collection> > >> </event> > >> </message> > >> > >> What do you think? > > > > Sure that would work. The only thing that I noticed is that the use of > > the 'id' attribute is not consistent with the use of the 'node' > > attribute everywhere else in this spec. > > > > If there are no implementers, I would suggest having > > <associate node='NodeID'/> and <disassociate node='NodeID'/>. > > Yes I like that better.
Good, we seem to have list consensus :-) -- Groetjes, ralphm
