25.08.2011 13:59, Matthew A. Miller wrote:
On Aug 24, 2011, at 20:43, Evgeniy Khramtsov wrote:
I don't like PEP, so I won't :P
What specifically about PEP do you not like? Or you can discover how to stop
worrying and love the PEP (-:
As for me, PEP scales poorly. I have already wrote on the topic in this
list and I'd like not to restart that flame :)
We already have vcard-temp:x:update for that.
In my opinion, "vcard-temp:x:update" is a hack:
* It is documented in XEP-0153 solely for vCard(-temp)-based avatars
So? :)
* It violates at least one SHOULD in RFC 6121 ยง 4.2.2 (presence update not
related to a user's availability for communication or the communication
capabilities of the resource)
SHOULD is not a MUST. Violate if you want.
* It requires at least one resource for a user to be or become online
(inappropriate to impossible for corporate/enterprise deployments)
Is it really a big issue?
Also, what happens when XEP-0292 supersedes XEP-0054?
Indeed, what? I really have no idea :)
--
Regards,
Evgeniy Khramtsov, ProcessOne.
xmpp:[email protected].
