On 14 Jun 2017, at 08:36, Steve Kille <[email protected]> wrote:
>> One thing I could imagine is for the server to include that information in 
>> the
>> roster version. E.g. if it usually versions the roster with incrementing
>> numbers, it could add "+mix" to the stringified number if MIX entries are
>> included. This would allow it to recognise that the client has or has not 
>> seen a
>> roster version with MIX and can create the diff accordingly.
> 
> That feels very ugly.

It’s up to the server how they encode roster versions, so a server choosing to 
do this seems entirely sensible to me (I suggested it offlist yesterday). It 
doesn’t need standardising, though, it’s a server implementation issue 
(although if we want to put in a sentence suggesting it’s possible, that 
wouldn’t be daft).

>> It took me a while to come up with this idea, so maybe it makes sense to add
>> that to the wording. Also I have never written a server-side roster
>> implementation, so I’m not sure if this is even a realistic way of doing 
>> things.
> [Steve Kille] 
> 
> I am thinking that Kev's idea of adding  "send MIX format" option to roster 
> request is the best way to go.

I think Jonas’s argument that if this is an ‘enable MIX’ rather than just ‘add 
MIX to the roster’ request, its own iq is right.

> Server will need to maintain things so that it can respond to both MIX and 
> non-MIX requests.
> 
> If a client changes its setting,   it needs to clear its cache and fetch the 
> full roster.

This is wrong, clients should not need to purge their roster cache, servers can 
always cope, and if they cope with a full push rather than a diff, that’s fine.

/K
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to