RE: number of tuples

I seem to remember raising the issue of the <note> element as a child of
<presence> a while back and suggesting that since it didn't seem to be
required as part of 2778/2779 that we should remove it, but the
consensus seemed to be that there was little cost to including it in the
specification and that it was useful to have. I hope that cost doesn't
increase by drawing us down roads we don't want to travel.

Having said that, I don't see the harm in making the change. I think it
might be quite reasonable that I delete my last communication device
(tuple) and that my presence gets published before I add the new
replacement. Is there a disadvantage to a null presence document?

Adrian.

On 27 November 2002 08:59, Peterson, Jon wrote:
> I do have one small reservation about this.
> 
> Clearly, being "out to lunch" suggests that you are not available.
> Considering that an automaton, for whatever reason, might be
attempting to
> ascertain your presence, it would better to provide a more easily
digestible
> state - one could argue that "out to lunch" is reducible to CLOSED in
most
> circumstances, and that therefore it should appear in a <tuple>. While
> currently <note> can appear as a child of either <presence> or
<tuple>, I
> don't think the possibility of using <note> in <presence> was intended
to
> provide an alternative to <status>, a kind of out-of-band and
> non-interoperable means of expressing status info. I always assumed
<note>
> was comparable to an 'away message' in existing IM systems - but in
PIDF
> that would presumably accompany an away <status> in a <tuple>.
> 
> Are there other motivating examples in which a <note> would appear as
a
> child of <presence> in which it does not effectively rephrase a
<status>,
> and in which there would be no need for any <tuple>s?
> 
> Jon Peterson
> NeuStar, Inc.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jonathan Rosenberg [mailto:[email protected]]
> > 
> > PIDF currently specifies that a presence document has to have ONE or

> > more tuples [emphasis added]. I requested a change so that this
could be 
> > ZERO or more tuples. Why? Because its reasonable to have presence
state 
> > which contains just a note:
> > 
> > <presence entity="im:[email protected]">
> >    <note>Out to Lunch</note>
> > </presence>
> > 
> > Does anyone see any problems with this?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Jonathan R.





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