Greetings
Does Messenger support the following :
1.Invisible status ?
2.browse for conference directory?
I see a lot of “Coming Soon” items on the Feature list, btw when is the next release
-Rajesh
Rajesh,
Does Messenger support the following :
1.Invisible status ?
2.browse for conference directory?
Those two features are not supported at this time. Messenger 1.1 will be released very shortly, but does not include those features either.
We’‘re planning on supporting MUC in a future release which should encompass #2, but we haven’‘t discussed invisible status before, so we’'ll have to get back to you on that.
Please let us know if you have any additional questions about Messenger.
Regards,
Matt
I’'d like to second the nomination for invisible status.
MUC browsing through disco is already supported. Is there a JEP you had in mind for invivislbe status? The JEP I found (JEP-18) includes the following warning:
WARNING: This JEP has been Rejected by the Jabber Council. Implementation of the protocol described herein is not recommended under any circumstances.
-Matt
Hi there – I wasn’'t familiar with JEPs until just now when I went to look that one up. I see that they have rejected it. Any idea why they think invisible is such a bad idea?
At the time I asked about it, I didn’'t know this – I was just asking because I find it a handy feature with other IM systems.
For me, the use case is: I need to log onto IM to ask a co-worker a question. I just need a quick answer. But as soon as I log on, a friend sees me and starts chatting with me. Of course I could always say, “sorry, I’'m busy and I only signed on to get in touch with someone for a quick question,” but that gets to be a pain. I’'d rather sign on invisibly, send a message to one person (perhaps becoming visible only to them) and move on with my life.
We’'d need to read through the archives in order to figure out why it was rejected – my guess is that it violates the XMPP RFC in some way.
Regards,
Matt
They thought it wasn’'t the right way to do it, or something like that. IIRC you should use privacy lists for that, and I think those are defined in the XMPP RFCs.