Hi Florian! On 2/28/12 7:42 PM, Florian Zeitz wrote: > Am 29.02.2012 03:02, schrieb Peter Saint-Andre: >> On 2/28/12 6:13 PM, Mark Rejhon wrote: >>> *[To Discuss] Matter of negotiation of activation of RTT feature* >>> /However/, XEP-0085 doesn't answer the question of an appropriate >>> negotiation model for deciding whether or not to enable RTT for a chat >>> session. (RTT is most ideal when both ends enable it) Peter, do you >>> think that my use case examples seem appropriate behaviour? >>> >>> Comments would be appreciated about this. >> >> I'm suggesting that you use a model similar to XEP-0085 -- if the other >> side advertises it (disco/caps), send the first message with some kind >> of RTT element. If the response comes back without an RTT element, don't >> include any RTT elements in subsequent messages within that conversation. >> >> Peter >> > > I tend to disagree with this. It would inherently require that both > sides do RTT.
That was the assumption behind chat state notifications. I think it's a reasonable assumption, but I also think that reasonable people can disagree about it. > I don't see any reason to enforce this artificial > requirement. It is perfectly fine for just one side to send RTT > messages, while the other one uses normal chat messages. > If someone doesn't want to receive RTT messages, he should just not > include the feature in the disco response. Sure. > Also I see absolutely no reason for any session negotiation for this XEP > whatsoever, especially without an option for the receiving party to > decline the session. A simple on/off switch on the sending end (only > availabe when the disco feature is present) seems sufficient to me. I too agree that we don't need session negotiation. > As a side note. What you described is actually quite different from what > XEP-0085 says. You're mixing the usual disco case with the backwards > compatibility case where no feature is present, but chat states might > still be supported. Quite possibly. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
