Whilst we're talking about tweaking the presence definition, what do people think about adding an "unknown" well-known presence value to the dictionary defined by GetStatuses? This would always have the type 0, ie unset, and would never be valid for setting on oneself. In a way any CM could arrange this anyway, but defining a well-known value would set a precedent and suggest to clients they should be able to deal with and display unknown presence if presented by a CM.
The rationale is that on XMPP, and on many other protocols, we actually know whose presence we're expecting to see[1]: the people on our roster, and the people who are in channels with us. Everyone else we don't know their presence at all, and we know that we don't know it. Currently when you do GetPresence, Gabble will default to saying they are offline, making it harder in UIs to present presence information. If they wanted to distinguish at the moment between offline (we know it) and offline (we're not subscribed), the UI has to make presumptions about the protocol's link between subscription states and availability of presence information. The CM is the right place for this information to be reported from. Comments? Regards, Rob 1: The exception is XMPP directed presence, but the presence cache in Gabble already has a way of deciding who is "interesting", so in this case if we're talking to someone and they decide to send us directed presence to reveal the fact they're online, and maybe also send us a nickname and caps, they will appear online until e.g. we close the channel, when they will revert to unknown. _______________________________________________ Telepathy mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
