[jdev] MUC and PubSub together?

[Michael Laukner]

Linking a pubsub node to a room seems to be covered at the protocol
level.  XEP-0045 chat room disco info supports "data attached to a
room" under Example 10. Room Returns Extended Disco Info Result

...
      <field var='muc#roominfo_pubsub'
             label='Associated pubsub node'>
        <value>xmpp:pubsub.shakespeare.lit?;node=the-coven-node</value>
      </field>

I am not sure if there is already a server that supports this?

Regards,
Michael


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Matthew Wild <mwild1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 May 2012 19:23, Kevin Smith <kevin at kismith.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Matthew Wild <mwild1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 29 May 2012 18:46, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
>>>> On 5/29/12 11:39 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Theo Cushion <theo at jivatechnology.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is something we are interested in doing as well. Our use case is that people could be involved in multiple discussions, but only actually want to join a room if something interesting is going on (for example, missed messages or a user joining the room). The Pubsub mechanism would provide a great choice for this as it means the node can be configured so that the client does not have to request any of this information, or join a room in order to receive updates.
>>>>>
>>>>> The most elegant way of doing this would be to have a pubsub service
>>>>> running on the MUC JID, just as PEP is a pubsub service running on a
>>>>> user's JID.
>>>>
>>>> Right, we've traditionally called this "MEP" (MUC Eventing Protocol) but
>>>> we've never defined the feature more fully than giving it a name.
>>>
>>> I did some experiments around this some time back:
>>> http://blog.prosody.im/multi-user-chat-gets-rich/
>>>
>>> However there are various approaches to tackling the problem, and I
>>> gather that many people don't think mine was the best. We had a group
>>> discussion on alternatives in Brussels in 2011, but again the
>>> conclusion was that all approaches had drawbacks, some being
>>> incredibly complicated - and so no consensus was reached.
>>
>> Wasn't your post about a different problem? I thought it was about
>> users publishing their own data (PEP through MUC) rather than having
>> data attached to the room.
>
> The thread turned to PEP-in-MUC, aka MEP which is, in my
> understanding, occupants publishing data to other occupants. You're
> right, this isn't what the OP asked about, which is more linking a
> pubsub node to a MUC.
>
> To offer my 2p on that specific problem, it just sounds like some
> custom server-side code is needed (probably in the MUC
> implementation). Discovering the node is perhaps something that could
> be solved at the protocol level, it's not the first time I've seen
> people wanting to link pubsub nodes to MUC rooms (though with slightly
> different goals - usually for in-room occupants to share data out of
> band).
>
> Regards,
> Matthew
> _______________________________________________
> JDev mailing list
> Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
> Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe at jabber.org
> _______________________________________________