Alexander Tsvyashchenko wrote: > > Tomasz, > > Quoting Tomasz Sterna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>> There's one other idea I have, but it may break backward >>> compatibility >>> and I'm not sure if it doesn't break something else: what if JIDs >>> like >>> 'domain.com' are treated like 'wildcards' (like it is now), but >>> '@domain.com' are considered to be exact matches of domain JID (so, >>> basically, JID with empty user name)? >>> >>> The same for resources: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' is treated like wildcard, >>> but '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/' is exact match of bare JID? >> >> I think it is counter-intuitive. >> Logic would hint that domain.com is exact match and @domain.com is a >> wild match. >> Similar with [EMAIL PROTECTED] is exact match and [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ is wild >> match. > > Yes, probably, but that would break current behavior for sure, while the > original approach seems to be less dangerous in this respect ... If > backward compatibility is not a problem, though, I personally would be > happy with either way of doing it.
Well, hmm, breaking backward-compatibility is not good, eh? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
