Re: [Simple] New IM-specific feature

[Deepanshu Gautam <deepanshu at huawei.com>]

I can foresee some disadvantage of using Presence for this as follows.
1. Adds more overhead as an explicit and periodic subscription is required 
(i.e Events and extension to presence).
2. Presence fits situation where IM sender (as watcher) gets information 
about IM recipient (as presentity), here the situation is reverse.
3. Will not allow user to choose from different option (QA) avaliable in 
real-time.
4. I may want to send some QA to those who are not my 'watchers' (because 
they don't care about my presence information) but v.important to me e.g HR 
delegate from a probable employer :-)
5. For page-mode delivery, subscribing to the right user agent and set of 
messages may not be easy.

We can consider these QA somewhat analogous to multimedia message-templates 
in current messaging(SMS, MMS, ...) system which is usefull and widely used. 
User can themselves create them for future use.

Regards
Deepanshu



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ben Campbell" <ben at nostrum.com>
To: "Deepanshu Gautam" <deepanshu at huawei.com>; "Simple WG" <simple at ietf.org>
Cc: "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzivat at cisco.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Simple] New IM-specific feature


> (as individual)
>
> I concur with Paul's opinion (and questions).
>
> To expand a bit, while I have seen some IM systems with this function,
> its utility seems weak in a _presence_ and IM system. That is, the  sort
> of information one might put into a QA is better communicated as  part of
> presence state. IMO, this sort of thing is exactly what the  presence
> distribution mechanism was designed for.
>
>
> On Aug 10, 2009, at 5:44 PM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>
> > Inline...
> >
> > Deepanshu Gautam wrote:
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > I would like to propose a new IM-specific feature for SIMPLE, which i
> > > would call as "Quick Answer(QA)". Allow me to explain about it  briefly.
> > >
> > > In instant messaging system, it is useful to have some readily
> > > available
> > > IM (text, audio or video) which can be sent in case of the receiver  is
> > > too busy to type/speak/record for a reply. User can create and  store IM
> > > (QA) using a particular client device and can use them when required.
> > > Creating and then storing on a single device may not be very useful
> > > because user can log-in a particular IM system using different client
> > > devices at different point of time. In that case QA created using one
> > > client device will not be available to another client device.
> > >
> > > I would like to propose a draft to solve this problem and perform the
> > > needed standardization, which will further make this IM-feature
> > > possible. Before moving forward I would like to get some initial
> > > comment
> > > from the group about this idea. You comments would be valuable.
> >
> > Where do you imagine this new state would be stored?
> > And who/what would use it?
> >
> > Are you proposing a "database" that is shared by the various UAs for  an
> > AOR, that they would each update and retrieve from?
> >
> > Would the sending of the answer still depend on a UA receiving the
> > message? Or do you expect that the answer will be sent even if there  is
> > no UA registered?
> >
> > IMO this doesn't fit well with the simple model.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Paul
> >
> > > Regards
> > > Deepanshu Gautam
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Simple mailing list
> > > Simple at ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
> > _______________________________________________
> > Simple mailing list
> > Simple at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple