* Kurt Zeilenga <[email protected]> [2014-12-22 05:50]: > 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.
The question is how XEP-0191 could be mapped onto XEP-0016 in a sane way. Why do you think the answer should be implementation-specific? Won't that just add to the current interoperability mess? Maybe we just have to admit that a sane mapping isn't possible, so those two extensions would have to be treated as unrelated and incompatible? Either way, I think this is a protocol issue, not an implementation issue. Holger
