Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > Well, we just talked about sharing it automatically, so there should be > a way to revoke it. :)
Right. This gets into the definition of a chat session, so I'm changing the subject. IMHO "chat session" is still a bit vague, and when I have time I'll work to clean that up in rfc3921bis. However for now I would suggest the following modified text: *** When two parties engage in a chat session but do not share presence with each other based on a presence subscription, they SHOULD send directed presence to each other so that either party can easily discover if the other party changes its availability or goes offline during the course of the chat session. However, a client MUST provide a way for a user to disable such presence sharing globally or to enable it only with particular entities. Furthermore, a party SHOULD send directed unavailable to the other party when it has reason to believe that the chat session is over (e.g., if, after some reasonable amount of time, no subsequent messages have been exchanged between the parties). ***
