> On Dec 22, 2014, at 5:31 AM, Kurt Zeilenga <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think if anything in XEP 191 needs to change, it’s the discussion of how
> one maps XEP 191 onto XEP 4 privacy lists that should change. It should be
> clearly stated that the blocking entity is required to perform the mapping in
> such a way that all communications with the blocked JID are blocked.
I would go a bit further… first, I would lift the MUST use a common backend
statement and leave implementation details mostly to the implementor. I would
say something like:
Where an implementation uses a common backend for Privacy Lists and
Block Lists, the implementation MUST ensure that the blocking behaviors exposed
to the user are consistent with the semantics of the particular request they
used manage the information held in that backend as detailed in their
respective specifications. This statement in no way alters the specified
semantics of the requests.
— Kurt
