Pavel Simerda wrote:
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:15:16 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Pavel Simerda wrote:I think the service discovery features are best defined in the specs that use BoB, such as XHTML-IM and file transfer, which is why IOn Thu, 7 Aug 2008 14:29:32 +0200 (CEST) "Marcus Lundblad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Hi. I saw that the use-cases of XEP-0231 has been removed along with the service discovery features.I believe we just lost the service discovery on the way. But it will be the same case as with XHTML-IM where the discovery is not mandatory. (E.g. you can't discover if you don't have a presence, it maybe stored offine and you don't know the client features yet.) I'm for putting the feature back if Peter agrees and for making the discovery optional.removed them from XEP-0231.Ok, I didn't notice this change was intentional. What about a short informational section when there's time for it?
Hmm. Do we really need those special service-discovery features? Perhaps all we need now is some text that says "don't include [only] cid: URIs unless the recipient supports BoB". The reason we had the disco features is that we didn't want to spam people with in-band binary unless they said that was OK, but now we're pretty much forcing you to send the cid: URI and then the recipient can decide if they want to retrieve the binary.
/psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
