RE: Communication means in draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-05

Well, <contact> or any other element.

The example it meant to illustrate that pidf, as it stands, does not carry any useful information to the watcher if only the minimum mandatory elements as they are now are sent in the pidf document.

If I, as a watcher, receive a pidf document that looks like the example I included in earlier emails, I have no means of understanding or using this information in a useful way. What does it mean to have 2 tuples, one with ID 342jrmeklrm and status open, and the other with ID jklejr983 and status closed.

e.g. (using sip)

SUBSCRIBE sip:[email protected] SIP/2.0
From: sip:[email protected]
To: "Jon Peterson " <sip:[email protected]>
....


NOTIFY sip:[email protected] SIP/2.0
From: sip:[email protected]
To: "Jon Peterson " <sip:[email protected]>
....
Content-type: application/cpim-pidf+xml

<tuple id="a67uyt76">
   <status>
      <basic>open</basic>
   </status>
</tuple>
<tuple id="432kljsd">
   <status>
      <basic>closed</basic>
   </status>
</tuple>

What would u present to the watcher in the GUI in this case?

Jon Peterson
           .... OPEN
           .... CLOSED

No useful information at all.

Feel free to substitute sip: with pres: or any other scheme.

Regards,
Hisham

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Peterson, Jon [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 11:47 PM
> To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP/Helsinki); [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Communication means in draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-05
> 
> 
> 
> Um, like Adrian I think up until now I haven't been sure 
> exactly what this
> example is intended to illustrate - but I think I can venture 
> a response.
> You're arguing that <contact> should be mandatory, right?
> 
> In order to get a PIDF document, presumably a watcher performs a
> subscription operation targeting a URI representing some 
> presentity. The
> watcher doesn't need any <contact> element in a response to 
> know who that
> presentity is - they sent a subscription to them (and of 
> course there is the
> 'entity' in <presence>). However it was that the watcher 
> learned the URI to
> which they subscribed, they may also have learnt contact 
> information about
> the principal. Also note that in some cases, the same URI 
> could be used for
> presence subscription and for subsequent communications (as 
> in your favorite
> and mine, the SIP URI). In that case there's no need for a <contact>
> element.
> 
> Also, as Adrian said, for some forms of presentities, 
> <contact> elements
> really wouldn't make sense. We've talked a bit about geolocation being
> expressed in presence - geolocation data for a presentity 
> could be consumed
> without any assumption that watchers should or could initiate further
> communication with the target principal.
> 
> So, I think <contact> should remain optional.
> 
> Jon Peterson
> NeuStar, Inc.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 10:47 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: Communication means in draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-05
> > 
> > 
> > That's my point. The PIDF example below gives you nothing, no
> > information about what's open and what's closed. That's why 
> > we need more info.
> > 
> > /Hisham
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ext Adrian Bateman [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 6:05 PM
> > > To: Khartabil Hisham (NMP/Helsinki)
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: RE: Communication means in draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-05
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 30 August 2002 10:27, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > What meaningful information can you depict form this?
> > > > 
> > > >      <tuple id="a67uyt76">
> > > >        <status>
> > > >          <basic>open</basic>
> > > >        </status>
> > > >      </tuple>
> > > >      <tuple id="432kljsd">
> > > >        <status>
> > > >          <basic>closed</basic>
> > > >        </status>
> > > >      </tuple>
> > > 
> > > > > This doesn't mean anything to me - I'm confused about the 
> > > > > point you are
> > > > > making. The contact address is optional to enable status 
> > > > > values that are
> > > > > independent of address to be included - clearly <basic> 
> > > doesn't fall
> > > > > into that case.
> > > 
> > > Still nothing. As I say, <basic> wouldn't be used in this sense.
> > > 
> > > Adrian.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical 
> > discussions, please]
> > 
> 



  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]