Subject: VS: Re: [Simple] [MSRP chat] Issue 7: Syntax of Nickname URI

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:25:10 +0300

Jeroen,

People write these messages, not computers. When I write "I agree with miguel(1)" is your client going to pop up an error? Think about it.

Cheers,
Aki

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: ext Jeroen van Bemmel
Lähetetty: 17.08.2007 18:09:33
Vastaanottaja: ext Jeroen van Bemmel;Niemi Aki (Nokia-TP-MSW/Helsinki);ext Brian Rosen
Kopio: ext Paul Kyzivat;Garcia Miguel (NSN - FI/Espoo);SIMPLE mailing list
Aihe: Re: [Simple] [MSRP chat] Issue 7: Syntax of Nickname URI

> Let's simulate a running discussion:
>
> [17:35:05] Miguel(1)-> This chat thing is great. Anyone know how to
> send
> a private message?
> [17:35:40] Miguel(2)-> Hi all!
> [17:36:01] Miguel(3)-> Ping...
>
> Now I decide to reply:
>
> [17:36:59] Aki-> Miguel(1): Nope. Might want to try selecting a buddy
> and right-click.
>
> Who is Miguel(1)? One client used an alternative scheme with Miguel_1,
> Miguel_2 and Miguel_3. So in that chat client, there is no Miguel(1)
> at all.
>

Aki,

Obviously, a sanely implemented client would make sure that any local 
conventions for dealing with duplicate nicknames are never sent across the 
wire. So in your example, what in your client gets displayed as "Aki -> 
Miguel(1)" would appear e.g. as "Aki [reply] -> Nope..." at other 
participants (depending on the conventions that their client implementation 
is using

The scenario above could occur when clients would have the bad habit of 
including local displaynames in messages they sent (I know some chat clients 
do this). For MSRP chat, the draft could state that they SHOULD NOT do this.

Regards,
Jeroen 

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: "Jeroen van Bemmel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:38:24 +0200

VS: Re: [Simple] [MSRP chat] Issue 7: Syntax of Nickname URIAki,

You did not specify which text was human generated versus computer 
generated, so I made an assumption.
Obviously we can't build a system that stops people from sending messages 
that others may misinterpret.

We could write guidelines such as
- clients SHOULD show displaynames as received from the conference server, 
and not try to decorate them
- to disambiguate duplicate nicknames, clients SHOULD use a scheme where 
they add "(n)" to the displayname, where 'n' starts at 1 and is increased 
for each duplicate nickname using XML document order
- servers SHOULD implement a mechanism to ensure unique displaynames

but to be honest, I don't think there is much of a problem: humans tend to 
have their own disambiguation mechanisms built-in

Regards,
Jeroen

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: [email-masked]
  To: [email-masked] ; [email-masked] ; [email-masked]
  Cc: [email-masked] ; [email-masked] ; [email-masked]
  Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 5:25 PM
  Subject: VS: Re: [Simple] [MSRP chat] Issue 7: Syntax of Nickname URI

  Jeroen,

  People write these messages, not computers. When I write "I agree with 
miguel(1)" is your client going to pop up an error? Think about it.

  Cheers,
  Aki

  -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
  Lähettäjä: ext Jeroen van Bemmel
  Lähetetty: 17.08.2007 18:09:33
  Vastaanottaja: ext Jeroen van Bemmel;Niemi Aki (Nokia-TP-MSW/Helsinki);ext 
Brian Rosen

  Aki,

  participants (depending on the conventions that their client 
implementation
  is using

  The scenario above could occur when clients would have the bad habit of
  including local displaynames in messages they sent (I know some chat 
clients
  do this). For MSRP chat, the draft could state that they SHOULD NOT do 
this.

  Regards,
  Jeroen

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:53:57 -0400

> miguel(1)" is your client going to pop up an error? Think about it.

People are also likely to write:

"I think miguel has gone insane. Last week he said X, and now he says Y"

when it turns out that the miguel of last week was different from the 
miguel of this week.

What you want can be achieved by a policy that restricts nicknames to 
those in a domain chosen by the conference, having relatively long term 
assignments of nicknames in that domain, and not allowing duplicates 
within that domain.

Almost as good, and more flexible, is the above plus allow nicknames 
from other domains, with the UIs always displaying the domain with 
nicknames that are not within the preferred domain of the conference. 
This means that if for some reason I want to use the nickname "aki", but 
it is already taken in the ietf.org domain that is default for the 
conference, I can perhaps sign up for "[email-masked]". Its not so 
different from my registering for "[email-masked]". But its a more 
stable identifier that I can perhaps use more widely.

	Paul

---

From: "Jeroen van Bemmel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:11:32 +0200

> those in a domain chosen by the conference, having relatively long
> term assignments of nicknames in that domain, and not allowing
> duplicates within that domain.

This would also require authentication of users against that domain

Is this needed in the conference data model? Could it work without being 
standardized?

Regards,
Jeroen

---

From: "Brian Rosen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:19:30 -0400

The "generalized" mechanism will (eventually) have a way to authenticate a
nickname at a domain against an AoR. 

Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeroen van Bemmel [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 12:12 PM
> To: Paul Kyzivat; [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: VS: Re: [Simple] [MSRP chat] Issue 7: Syntax of Nickname URI
>