[JDEV] Chatting with the correct resource

[Peter Saint-Andre]

This seems like an implementation issue, so I think the JDEV list is the
right place for this. Please don't cc xmppwg at jabber.org on this further.

That said, I'm sure it would be quite helpful for someone to write an
implementer's guide to XMPP. Maybe I'll tackle that after the I-Ds
advance to RFC.

/psa

On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:14:53AM -0700, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> This is one of those things that is a little counter-intuitive.  The
> language that's in the spec is correct, particularly when combined with the
> rule that if a message is sent to a non-existent resource, it gets delivered
> as if it has no resource.
> 
> There have been clients in the past that always sent to the user at host jid
> (which is what you are suggesting), and user-experience-wise, they aren't
> great, since some of the messages in a conversation end up going to the two
> different resources, as auto-away priority changes happen.
> 
> The rules that are in the spec are our based on our best practices based on
> real use patterns that we've seen.
> 
> -- 
> Joe Hildebrand
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mikael Hallendal [mailto:micke at imendio.com] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:00 AM
> > To: Jabber Devel List
> > Cc: XMPPWG at jabber.org
> > Subject: [JDEV] Chatting with the correct resource
> > 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Ralph bugged me about Gossip not handling resources correctly 
> > when chatting with a person that is logged in with multiple resources.
> > 
> > According to the spec we don't but I'm a bit unsure on how to 
> > handle this in a way that both conforms with the spec and is 
> > good for the user interface.
> > 
> > The paragraph in the spec is 4.1:
> > http://www.jabber.org/ietf/draft-ietf-xmpp-im-18.html#messaging
> > 
> > Basically what it says (if I underestand it correctly) is 
> > that if you are chatting with a certain resource you are to 
> > continue to send your messages there until you either get a 
> > message from that person with a new resource set or that 
> > resource goes offline (that is how I interpret "the resource 
> > is no longer available").
> > 
> > The problem with this is that you'll continue to send 
> > messages to a resource even if another resource gets online 
> > and has a higher priority.
> > It also means that you are going to send messages to a 
> > resource even if it's set as away and another resource is set online.
> > 
> > What I would like is that you send the messages to the 
> > resource with the highest priority. In Gossips case this also 
> > means the resource that is online has a higher priority than 
> > a resource set to away.
> > 
> > So to my question, this might be a good idea to clearify in the spec.
> > What does "available" mean, is it that the resource is online 
> > or that the resource isn't busy, away, ext-away?
> > 
> > Regards,
> >   Mikael Hallendal