On 7 Sep 2016, at 10:32, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 7 Sep 2016 11:28, "Kevin Smith" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 7 Sep 2016, at 10:22, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > If this seems right, I'll write this up formally into the XEP and go > > > > > from there. > > > > > > > > It’s not clear to me that another stanza is necessary, and that this > > > > can’t come out of normal caps handling by the server. It’s probably not > > > > the end of the world to have one, but I think I would be inclined to > > > > start investigating things in terms of the traditional caps mechanism, > > > > and then upgrade to a new stanza when we find it’s needed. I’m > > > > relatively low-F on this (maybe 4ish). > > > > > > Placing them into "actual" caps and disco means either: > > > > > > * they're exposed globally. > > > * clients have to respond to disco in different ways depending on the > > > requestor. > > > > > > The former seems bad, the latter seems like error cases would be both > > > easy and bad. > > > > I think there’s two blocks of data. One is capabilities, which we already > > have a mechanism for sorting out, so I think it’d make sense to re-use here > > (and this is already public). > > > > The second is the effective blocklist. It’s clear this shouldn’t go into > > presence. > > > > Perhaps the ‘blocklist’ stanza can come first, so the blocklists are > > prepopulated for the session when presence is then (immediately, > > presumably) received and the capability-based stuff kicks in. > > > > My reasoning is based on two things: > > > > 1) I firmly believe that the common case is that if a user wants to be in a > > particular MIX, they want to see it on all of their clients that are > > capable of seeing it. > > 2) Where we already have a mechanism for advertising client capabilities, I > > think we should reuse it. > > > > and going from there. > > > > OK, I can buy into this. > > So the result would be that those <any-*/> portions vanish, becoming subsumed > into caps?
From my understanding of the proposal, yes. It also removes the ‘maybe inject into caps’ bit, because they’re there already. It makes the iq just the blocklist/whitelist. /K _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
