[JDEV] JEP-0022 MMmm whats that type again?

[Peter Saint-Andre]

No one ever said that JEP-0022 made sense. :)

Personally I think we need to have a serious discussion about JEP-0022
vs. JEP-0085 and get this composing notification stuff finalized. Expect
me to push the issue with the next Council. But frank discussion on this
list or standards-jig would be good.

Peter

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 04:52:48PM -0400, Daniel Chote wrote:
> Im kinda curious about the message type usage in JEP0022.  In the jep 
> the examples messages are sent with no type attribute...
> Even tho the type attribute in a message packet isnt really that 
> important, and really only holds UI style relevance, there is a certain 
> level of relativity you should keep.  For instance... if I am holding a 
> conversation with someone, who also supports jabber:x:events, and the 
> messages that are going back and forward between the two users have 
> attrib type="chat" in them, shouldnt the events hold the same attribute 
> type="chat"?  The argument that would go against this is of course the 
> fact that messages without a body shouldnt be sent with a type... but 
> thats where i disagree, because if that was the case... then the 
> attribute type would hold a little more importance than just a UI 
> aspect, would it not?
> 
> wouldnt it be cleaner, to structure event packets around the same base 
> of the message packets that you are sending around them?  I mean, for 
> clients that support threads, they all keep the thread information in 
> tact, why should this be any different for the parent node of the packet?
> 
> I dunno, it doesnt really make much sense to me.
> -- 
> Daniel Chote
> Developer/Designer and typical drunk!
> email/jabber: daniel at chote.net
> blog: http://daniel.chote.com
> website: http://www.chote.com