From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Laurent Eschenauer
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 4:00 PM
To: XMPP Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] Could anyone using XMPP-0277 or PEP help us test
our Onesocialweb implementation ?
>I think that the protocol should capture the threading information, and
leave it up to the clients to decide how that is presented to the >users.
Some will prefer the twitter style (reflecting maybe better the way
conversation may happen in real life) and the more regular >commenting
style.
How would threading work then in a real implementation? In the situation of
A, B, C where B and C are only subscribed to A and A posted something to A's
PEP node and B posted a reply which only goes to B's PEP node, how would C
ever get that message? Would the implementation send it to C somehow (and
how, a PEP message?)
It seems like in twitters model the conversation thread is not the central
thing, but the user is. This results in twitter streams looking like a lot
of people "talking past" each other. It's a very bad model, there isn't any
conversation or communication in twitter, just a lot of disconnected posts.
In my opinion the conversation thread should be the key element. Users
should contain threads which could be subscribed to.
Maybe I am in the minority, but I prefer to follow threads of conversations
of interest, not everything a person chooses to post.
