On 05/23/2012 03:24 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 5/22/12 12:40 PM, Sergey Dobrov wrote: > > Well, the need to *change* it from the default to some reasonable value > implies that the default value is unreasonable. That might depend on > implementation and deployment (e.g., if someone runs an XMPP interface > to an existing microblogging service, or a dedicated XMPP-based > microblogging service, then the defaults might be perfectly reasonable). > Thus I don't think the SHOULD is necessary here. It could say "verify > that the max items setting is reasonable for microblogging purposes and > change if necessary".
Agree. > > But I certainly might want to receive the last published item whenever I > log in. This too seems like a setting that a dedicated microblogging > service would tune in their configuration. > Yes, it reasonable thing but do you think we should think about user subscription preferences more deeply? >> The meaning is just to provide easy way to obtain this very important >> data by just retrieving some magic constant named item. > > We usually try to avoid magic values. :) > It's a good position and perhaps it's good enough for pubsub nodes but think about comments nodes: 1) extra node can lead to nodes names conflicts easier (again we need some magic value to construct new node name) 2) it's harder to clean up: to delete post from blog you will need three retracts which can't be done atomic. -- With best regards, Sergey Dobrov, XMPP Developer and JRuDevels.org founder.
