-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Aug 23, 2012, at 07:07, Matthew Wild wrote: > Hi Jefry, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > On 23 August 2012 03:52, Jefry Lagrange <[email protected]> wrote: >> I don't think the use case with message is enough. It would be more >> clear if it had an use case with an IQ. It is not clear how one should >> respond to a forwarded IQ. > > Mmm :) > > The specification used to be "message forwarding", and the last > revision changed it to allow the forwarding of any stanza. I think > this is fine, as I understand some protocols may want to forward all > kinds of stanza. > > However outside such a protocol, receiving a forwarded iq doesn't seem > to make much sense to me. It certainly shouldn't be treated as an > actual <iq> in my opinion. There are far too many problems with that. > >> Another question would be: Is it possible to bypass the middle man, >> once you get the forwarded stanza (in case you need to reply)? > > In the case of a forwarded message that is displayed to the user - > it's the user's choice whether to send a reply, and who to. > > In the case of any other kind of stanza, or one forwarded as part of > another protocol - that's really something specific to that protocol, > and not the forwarding mechanism. > > If there are no objections to my line of thinking, I'll try and > clarify the XEP - at least about <iq>s. This fits with my interpretation, too. - - m&m Matthew A. Miller <http://goo.gl/LK55L> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQNjMxAAoJEJq6Ou0cgrSPB/QIAMW6iu2AkSZ6PyLuNF8H7doK RSwrBb81sLowOTSg5VMVgzbmaJLCNFtTa/gRU30AF5ING5mg5otU1ADLDQQbByCv mJdhovTK347Kjehg8mzdp1xEgOB08E0YD1drXB5OEQYmf4IkV+s9nwiEeisscGSo 0H4FvrSaLxaorzFFCrQ5N6RE0zEmauC8TcSN8I9Z/I1bJnVa8BDJOtYW29G7a9bD oRBvoIjWNgexZCDUHLtSneV4utdsuwyhWY//ovAVmVhjt8u7PmIzteNnBx6QRU+4 XYP01FJD580efzOvPRJo9bW/SY4ymIlKcOvFI377K1B2ffAnW1qeDO953rWM51Q= =teSF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
