On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 03:19:30PM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote: > I begin to wonder whether we should have a section in the Telepathy spec > with protocol-specific notes, like the recommended mapping between > JIDs/etc. and handles.
It would be better than "do it like [Gabble/Salut]". :-) But, are many more different implementations of the same protocol likely? > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 at 14:09:46 +0000, Will Thompson wrote: > > * Myspace: account parameter is the email address you sign up to myspace > > with. Normalized handles are either such email addresses, or the > > alphanumeric string "nnnrgh" of a profile URL like > > <http://www.myspace.com/nnnrgh>. There's normalization from one form to > > the other (I can't remember the direction), which doesn't always work > > (kind of like the protocol plugin in general, actually, but the > > developer has just reappeared so maybe it'll improve!). > > Urgh. If I remember correctly, every myspace account is uniquely ID'd by > an email address, and some (but not all) myspace accounts have a short > name too? I doubt we particularly care about 100% correct semantics > though :-P That's right. And, I believe that normalizing one to the other if the contact isn't on your buddy list involves a network round trip, which libpurple's normalization hook doesn't support. But, I'm sure all of the Telepathy + MyspaceIM users out there don't mind too much. :-) > > * local-xmpp: as Salut, except you have to supply an account parameter, > > which is a bug. > > Yeah... but you can make it optional at the Tp level, and if missing, > use the same algorithm as Salut, right? :-) Yes, I could. It's now #14214. It's not high on my TODO list. -- Will
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Telepathy mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
