Michal4
1
I found some bugs in MUC implementation (file Room.as):
line 380:
fieldmap[ “FORM_TYPE” ] = [ MUCOwnerExtension.NS ];
It suposed to be fieldmap[ “FORM_TYPE” ] = [“http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig”] ?
line 1208:
ext.addItem( null, voice ? MUC.ROLE_PARTICIPANT : MUC.ROLE_VISITOR );
There is no nickname? Server will return error.
it suposed to be:
ext.addItem( null, voice ? MUC.ROLE_PARTICIPANT : MUC.ROLE_VISITOR, occupantNick );
?
Can you please point to the specific documentation which explains the namespace usage you suggest?
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html
The latter suggestion makes sense, thus applied.
"Example 158. Service Sends Configuration Form to Owner
<field
type='hidden'
var='FORM_TYPE'>
<value>[http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig](http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig)</value>
</field>
"
and
"Version 1.17 (2004-10-04)
(…) modified FORM_TYPE for room configuration from http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#owner to http://jabber.org/protocol/muc#roomconfig
"
Every server I tested sends this namespace and XIFF changes this when the form is submited, why?
Seems this needs to be changed. Can you provide a small example of a possible use case for testing?