Re: SIMPLE chat: Internationalization and normalization of nicknames
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.simple |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 3/1/12 3:54 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > > On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> On 3/1/12 3:45 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:26 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/1/12 3:12 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>> (as individual) >>>>> >>>>> I concur with this approach in general, although I think we will >>>>> find some differences between the Resource parts in 6122/6122bis >>>>> and the use of nicknames in simple-chat. In particular: >>>>> >>>>> 1) A resource part identifies something. That makes uniqueness >>>>> and comparisons fairly important. OTOH, a nickname is really for >>>>> human display purposes. We still need to be able to compare them >>>>> for reservations to work. And the human readability part means we >>>>> should at least mention character confusion issues. >>>> >>>> In the chatroom context, XMPP resourceparts are mostly used for >>>> display purposes but also for some authorization decisions (e.g., >>>> we can kick people based on their nickname). As far as I understand >>>> it, the uses are really quite similar in XMPP chatrooms and SIMPLE >>>> chatrooms. >>>> >>> >>> My understanding of simple-chat is that the participant that you make >>> policy decisions about would be identified by a bona-fide URI. For >>> example, if we kick someone, we would supply the URI. The nickname >>> is a data attribute associated with the URI, and really is a display >>> name for most practical purposes. Of course, you might select the >>> nickname in a GUI in order to get you client to do the right thing. >> >> OK. It seems that you might also be making some authorization decisions >> based on the nickname, e.g., if you've reserved a nickname then I can't >> get that nickname (can I join the chatroom but just not with that >> nickname?). >> > > Yes, that is true. We do need an equality operator in some sense. (And yes, assuming no other policy issue was blocking you, you could still use a different nickname) If it were just a pretty display thing, life would be easier. So we'll need to get into issues of comparison and equality. This could be fun. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/