On 03.12.2014 19:16, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: > This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0319 (Last > User Interaction in Presence). > > Abstract: This specification defines a way to communicate time of last user > interaction with her system using XMPP presence notifications. > > URL: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0319.html > > This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on > 2014-12-17. > > Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send your > feedback to the [email protected] discussion list: > > 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to > clarify an existing protocol?
Christian and Tobias already gave good pro and contra arguments. It comes down to: Does the usage of absolute timestamps justify a new XEP? I don't have any practical experience regarding this, but my intuition says: Yes it does. (It appears to me that absolute timestamps should have been used in XEP-12 from the start.) > 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and > requirements? Yes > 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not? Yes. Even it means abstracting XEP-256 and XEP-319 in the (client) library, which I usually try to avoid. But it's not possible when there are two XEPs used in the wild, that try to solve the same problem. > 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? None other than those mention in the XEP. > 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? It would be nice if there was a section explaining the motivation for this XEP. Readers may wonder what why it's required since we have XEP-256. - Florian
