On 22 March 2017 at 20:08, Ruslan N. Marchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 22.03.2017 20:37, Sam Whited wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Yann Leboulanger <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> One nice feature we also don't have with blocking command is blocking a >>> while group. >> >> >> Ah yes! I knew there was something else that I was forgetting to >> address from last time. >> >> I also think this is not a good thing; it is an abuse of roster >> groups, and leads to an inconsistent experience across clients. It >> also makes the UX incredibly frustrating. For example: >> >> I block a group "work", but then I decide I want to talk to one of my >> coworkers so I go to their chat, but it says they're blocked. I hit >> unblock: what happens? > > > It's probably UX problem but not list per se.
If a protocol explicitly creates UX problems, it's a protocol problem. > > List allows you creating overriding allow entry which will unblock single > person while keeping the group blocked (order matters). There's no way for one client to inform another that this is not a general standalone rule, but an explicit exception to a previous rule, however. There's no way to say that this exception is a temporary case, rather than the norm. There's no way to indicate that this is actually a general rule because this particular co-worker is also an XSF member, and people in both groups are always unblocked. I would much rather have clients using a simple interface that covers the 90%, than not using a complicated one which fails to cover more than 95%. Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
