RE: Let's fix THE PROBLEM

Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> Yes, there are times when I want to publish and subscribe
> to a different list of people than the people that are 
> subscribed to my presence, but that's pub/sub, not presence.
	Sorry if I'm being dense here, but can you explain why one is
"presence" and the other is "PubSub" even though I'm subscribing to
"Presence" data in both cases?

> I can imagine implementations that use pub/sub for 
> presence, that don't require anything drastic:
	What I meant by "drastic" wasn't a technical comment, but rather
a process comment. As your example shows, doing Presence over PubSub is
pretty obvious and doesn't present major technical problems. The
"drastic" thing that I was referring to would be a redefinition of
Presence in XMPP to rely on PubSub rather than using the existing
mechanism. 

>I'm not sure how that's a single, monolithic package.
	Sorry. Bad word choice. A better word might be "stand-alone." In
XMPP, Presence doesn't use either PubSub or an events package like in
SIP/SIMPLE. This may tend to result in people overloading Presence to
accomplish things that would be better done with PubSub since Presence
is almost guaranteed to be implemented by everyone whereas PubSub, as an
optional protocol extension, is now and probably will remain less
commonly implemented.

		bob wyman




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