Howdy, On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks Lance. >> >> Does anyone else have feedback on 152? Is anyone other than Lance using >> it? >> > > Anyone, please? > Here some comments from my first read of it: 1. This is not limited to this XEP. It allows for sending the human readable description text in different languages, via PEP and direct presence. Are there protocols to prevent the subscribers receiving the description in languages they won't display anyway? For direct presence would it make sense to recommend only sending the language the receiver will display? Or is xml:lang not used in implementations, i.e. the sender can't know the language in the direct presence case? 2. Since the <reach/> node must have at least one entry, one can't indicate no reachability by other means other than by dropping the feature of supporting the XEP at all. This will only be noticed by clients supporting caps or when subscribers poll for the features again. Maybe it'd make sense to allow an empty <reach/> node. Cheers, Tobi
