On 3/14/12 1:32 AM, "Sergey Dobrov" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 03/14/2012 07:04 AM, Joe Hildebrand wrote: >> On 3/13/12 2:55 AM, "Sergey Dobrov" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Actually, it's >>> not clear how pubsub service will receive the presence in case of pubsub >>> (and not presence) subscription. >> >> PEP. > > So the title of the XEP can mislead. The other thing that the same > problem exists for the regular pubsub so it will be necessary to invent > the other XEP which solve the same problem other way... It could be used by non-PEP pubsub, by, for example, sending an ago stanza in your subscribe, or by translating it into a subscription option. >>> And again the XEP will have problems with from/to subscription states.. >> >> No. PEP. It only really works with subscription='both'. >> > > I *really* can't understand which applications are suitable to solve > with such PEP restriction except of moods/tunes/etc (but pubsub since is > completely unnecessary for such applications). XEP-292. Both my vCard that you have subscribed to as well as my list of contacts. I don't want the client to have to receive all of these vCards every time they log in, including the base64 avatars. > The real applications for which the XEP can be useful (i.e. > microblogging) are needed to be fully compliant with the regular > presences. So I think that the problem should be solved in future but > such XEPs only make the solution even harder. Can you say that another way, please? I didn't quite understand your point. > I will be pretty happy to know if I wrong but I did not even hear about > any applications PEP is needed in the current state. I mentioned XEP-292 earlier in the thread. -- Joe Hildebrand
