[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [lemonade] some questions in draft-ietf-lemonade-notifications-03
On Wed Aug 9 09:36:18 2006, Ben Last wrote:
>"Randall Gellens" <randy at qualcomm.com> wrote:
>> If so, maybe it's more appropriate to send a notification after
>> determining that the client is online (e.g. according to presence
status
>> of the client provided by presence enabler).
>How do you think this approach?
Many presence systems allow the user to set their status as
"offline"
(even though they're not really offline): the presence status is
aimed
at other humans and gives the user's interruptability. That may
not be
appropriate for a server to use when determining whether to send new
mail notifications.
True, but equally, most presence mechanisms have the concept of
appearing offline by default, but allowing a directed presence to
indicate they're online to certain endpoints. In general, I think
this would be good enough - you'd simply have the client appear
offline, but send a directed presence for the notification server.
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at jabber.org
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
lemonade at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade