Re: Let's fix THE PROBLEM

Hi Bob, all,
That was my point exactly. The 'presence' applications
that are often discussed more concerned with reuse of a
transport/communications mechanism than with the idea of presence itself. A
more generic events mechanism is required.

So there's at least 3 members on this list that are in broad agreement that
the current situation is not good and is probably the frustrating the
evolution of both true presence-based services and their underyling
communications mechanisms.

We need some solutions.  We can propose a new working group alright  but if
there isn't substantial support from both SIMPLE & XMPP working groups there
doesn't seem much point.

Does that support exist?

regards,

    ...shane



Bob Wyman wrote:

> > Arguably my toaster has as much right to produce
> > presence information as I do
> But, you will want more from your toaster than just "presence"
> information! It is nice to know that the thing exists, however, you
> probably would like to know what it is doing, what its current
> temperature is, when it starts to process a new piece of toast, and
> you'd like to be alerted whenever an internal sensor detects a
> significant change in state. You could pump all this over some
> "presence" system, but the reality is that little of this data is really
> "presence" related. What you should have is a PubSub transport layer
> that allows the toaster to send out messages that are of type "Presence"
> or of type "Toaster Status". These are two types of message that use the
> same PubSub transport layer (i.e. Subscribe, Publish, Notify, Watch,
> etc...)
> Many of the "presence" applications that I hear about (other
> than IM buddy lists) appear to involve exploiting the Presence protocol
> to send information that isn't really "presence" related but would be
> better handled by a PubSub protocol. What is happening is that people
> are recognizing that the presence protocols are likely to be widely
> disseminated and they are trying to figure out how to exploit these
> implementations as transports for other applications. i.e. Presence,
> which should be something that lives at the presentation layer, is being
> treated as a transport layer protocol. This is wrong.
>
> bob wyman
>
>
>
>
>   [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]
>
>




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