On May 28, 2013, at 11:18 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> My opinion at the moment is that the current toggle is the sort of > protocol wart that it's possible to get caught up in, but really makes > no practical difference to anyone beyond aesthetics I heartily concede that this is very probably the case, especially for Carbons; moving on. > Carbons/Markers are local. Well, Carbons is local, sure. Markers I'm not sure about yet because <switches to Chat Markers discussion> the current proposal is still a bit hand wavy when dealing with multiple servers. So consider [email protected]/orchard and [email protected]/balcony, and both have expressed interest in using chat markers. Romeo sends Juliet a message, and Juliet updates her read information on capulet.lit (which is allowed and useful even if Juliet is the only one that supports the markers). But capulet.lit needs to know if [email protected]/orchard supports chat markers to send it an updated read marker from Juliet. It would need caps for that. Or, does it even care about resources? Does capulet.lit instead send a request to the bare [email protected] to update the marker, and let montague.lit archive and forward it to the interested resources? My initial feeling is that it should care about resources, because of MUC.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
