Re: Presence problem in large MUC rooms.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 11:29:10 +0100
"Goffi" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Le vendredi 30 janvier 2026, 11:10:36 heure normale d’Europe centrale
> Stephen Paul Weber a écrit :
> > Somebody signing messages as Goffi wrote:  
> > >Le vendredi 30 janvier 2026, 10:52:31 heure normale d’Europe
> > >centrale  
> Stephen Paul Weber a écrit :
> > >> >We don't have to be actively in the room. What we want when we
> > >> >are in a large room, is to be able to check it when we want,
> > >> >and be notified when  
> we
> > >> >are mentioned.  
> > >>
> > >> So you want to have the option to not only not get presence
> > >> live, but  
> also
> > >> not get live messages?  
> > >
> > >??? Why we would not have the live messages? If the client is in
> > >the room,  
> it's an "active" join, and it's working as usual.
> >
> > Yes but your whole proposal is about adding this "passive" join
> > which I understood to not want live messages, correct?  
> 
> Yes, for rooms where the client is not actively displaying the chat,
> and you get notifications when you are mentioned (or we can add
> another option to get notification for every message, we still skip
> <presence> in this case).
> 
> In short the room automatically get from "active" to "passive" when
> the client is not actively showing it and vice
> versa.

so, if i'm understanding proper, it would be a bit like Client State
Indication where we are dumped the messages when we are actually
looking at the MUC, right?

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]