It will be not handy to maintain the list manually through the application specific protocol. It would be better to have some "Friends sharing protocol" instead, I think. The other problem here (that doesn't keep in mind modern social networks) is that user's friends may not want to be visible in others' friend lists. This fact will do this protocol even more complicated.
On 02/11/2013 06:25 PM, Ashley Ward wrote: > On 11/02/2013 10:24, "Sergey Dobrov" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Don't you guys think that the fact that PEP has subscribers from a >> user's roster does such feature dangerous? > > Yes, I agree. You wouldn't want to make this the general case as there are > serious privacy concerns with automatically sharing this information > (roster items or general pubsub subscriptions). > > With pubsub subscriptions there is also the case that your home server > doesn't actually know your subscriptions on a remote server. This is > another one of the reasons that I think storing and sharing this > information should be application specific. > > PEP provides a good place to store this information, but I think the data > should be stored in the pep nodes in an application specific manner, > rather than trying to generalise it. > > The application itself is then responsible for obtaining user's consent to > share this information, and deciding what information is stored and > disseminated. > > I don't think anything about this should be mandated in the xmpp spec at > the moment. The tools are already there to handle this sort of thing. > > There may be a case for adding discovery of other user's subscriptions to > the xep-0060 spec, but you would have to also add methods of controlling > access to that information too, and it's already complex enough! > > -- > Ash > > > -- With best regards, Sergey Dobrov, XMPP Developer and JRuDevels.org founder.
