On 05/28/2008 12:44 PM, Robert McQueen wrote: > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> Therefore I think the content-replace action is unnecessary in XEP-0176 >> (since nomination in the Jingle ICE-UDP transport will also occur over >> STUN and does not need to happen in the signalling channel). >> >> Unless there are objections, I will update XEP-0176 accordingly (a usage >> inherited by some of the examples in XEP-0167 and XEP-0180, which will >> be harmonized with the modified XEP-0176). > > +1 from me. My gut feeling is that content-replace is more of a content > apocalypse in terms of implementations. I don't think it's reasonable to > expect people to have to diff content descriptions and transports in > normal operation - it should have a similar semantic/behaviour as > content-remove and content-add delivered simultaneously.
Hmm. I agree that content-replace should be equivalent to simultaneous content-remove and content-add. I thought it was, but perhaps I was wrong. :) However, it seems that we need content-replace during PENDING in order to handle certain fallback use cases (see the thread on Jingle file transfer). I am going to update XEP-0234 to use this model so that we can see if it will solve the fallback problem in a more elegant way. If so, I may request that we allow content-replace during PENDING. More soon. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
