Dave Cridland wrote: > I'm wondering if we can split the issue, here, and instead have two > mini-protocols: > > 1) The "Hey, I have pending messages here!" one. (ie, a bare_jid-wide > version of the flashing taskbar item thingy.) > > I'm wondering if intra-jid presence can be made to do the first - so the > clients would send a directed presence to their own bare jid which > contained "private" status, including any pending messages. > > Assuming the intra-jid presence trick can be used, then servers need to > do nothing. Otherwise, I'm tempted to suggest that we simply standardize > that hack, and then we've a general method for doing similar things.
Presence, message, what difference does it make? I see no special reason to use presence instead of message here, in fact it doesn't have anything to do with presence so I'd prefer message. Then the question is: does your proposal (which I don't grok, perhaps you could post more details) cut out the server in a way that the MINE stuff doesn't? Are you perhaps suggesting a generalized algorithm for construction of a UUID for each message, so that the claiming client can send a special message (or presence) to the other resources so that the others know it has claimed the message? I think I'm missing something here. Yes it would be nice if we didn't need to change any servers to make this happen (just make it so that they send bare-JID message to all resources), but it's not clear to me how we can make that work. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
