Re: draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-06.txt (was: WG Last Call on multip le documents (deadline Jan 12))

BTW, assuming we want to define a Status for other media, such as telephony,
etc., a quick look at the SIMPLE mailing list postings over the past week or
so ("Extending <status> for presence") should be enough to convince anyone
that a binary OPEN/CLOSED model is pretty useless on its own (i.e. enables
only trivial applications).

Thanos
---
Thanos Diacakis
Openwave Systems
[email protected]
+1-303 385 6705


----- Original Message -----
From: "Peterson, Jon" <[email protected]>
To: "'Thanos Diacakis'" <[email protected]>; "'Dave Crocker'"
<[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-06.txt (was: WG Last Call on multip
le documents (deadline Jan 12))


>
> If you honestly believe that the concepts of OPEN and CLOSED have no
> applicability to any other communications system than IM, then I'm not
sure
> what I can say to persuade you. The PIDF document derives from the
> requirements set forward in RFC2779, which do make note of IM, and
> consequently the way that OPEN and CLOSED are defined mentions IM. But the
> contention that OPEN and CLOSED are, as you say, 'total specific' to IM
> seems very dubious to me give the clear applicability of these concepts to
> telephony, Internet gaming, video, and so on. What these concepts mean for
> IM is 'you are able to receive communications' or not. I'm not sure how
> their application to other forms of communication is ambiguous.
>
> Jon Peterson
> NeuStar, Inc.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thanos Diacakis [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:23 AM
> > To: Peterson, Jon; 'Dave Crocker'
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: draft-ietf-impp-cpim-pidf-06.txt (was: WG Last Call on
> > multip le documents (deadline Jan 12))
> >
> >
> > Jon Peterson wrote:
> >
> > > Well, as I suggested, we had a thread then about how <status>, for
> > example,
> > > was not specific to IM at all. Nor is the concept of
> > <contact>. Presence
> > > concerns communications status, and the disposition of a presentity
> > towards
> > > particular avenues of communication. I think the concepts
> > of <status> and
> > > <contact> are equally applicable to voice, video, Internet
> > gaming, and
> > what
> > > have you. So I don't think these elements really are
> > specific to IM. In
> > > other words, I think <status> and <contact> are valid
> > normative concepts
> > for
> > > presence.
> >
> > Status, as defined in PIDF, is *totally* specific to IM, as
> > the only values
> > for status that are defined are IM specific, i.e. we do not
> > state what they
> > mean in a different context.
> >
> > Thanos
> > ---
> > Thanos Diacakis
> > Openwave Systems
> > [email protected]
> > +1-303 385 6705
> >
> >
>




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