On Aug 24, 2011, at 22:19, Evgeniy Khramtsov wrote: >>> >>> 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 only covers pushing an update when the avatar changes, not changes to given name, surname, phone numbers, etc. >> * 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. > From RFC 2119: SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. I don't see "Violate if you want" anywhere in that description. >> * 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? > Yes it is. For corporate and enterprise environments, the vCard information is most often managed in a central location (such as LDAP/AD). These same environments often have a strong requirement for updates to be broadcasted in a timely manner. - m&m <http://goo.gl/voEzk>
