Subject: [Simple] Quests reg Presence Processing Model and RPID..

From: Girish Vasvani <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 13:21:43 -0700 (PDT)

Hi,

Am new to this mailing list, joined just today, have several questions..

1. How do I search this mailing list ? I couldn't find any search link on this mailing list page.

2. Several items were not clear to me while reading "Presence Processing Model" draft from Rosenberg (01 version which is the latest).

      a. Can Presence Server (PA) provide different presentity status based on who the watcher is ? If yes, is this change made during filtering (Watcher or Privacy) or during composition Or, it's left upto the implementer of PA. Or, PA never makes such change per watcher basis ?

      b. I'm assuming "Raw Presence Document" in Figure 1 of this draft implies a single such document. Based on individual watchers, PA could generate multiple such presence doc and this step is not performed in "Composition" (sec 4.2.2) !! Please, correct me if I'm wrong here.

3. Is it possible for RPID doc to contain activity status codes etc. in UTF-8 form (f.e. to support language codes that are non-English) ? In general, is there guide-line on PIDF/RPID and Multi-language support (sorry, am not quite familiar with XML Schema + Multi-language support either to deduce an answer from respective drafts).

thanks in advance,

Girish

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

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

---

From: Girish Vasvani <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:06:39 -0700 (PDT)

Looks like this mailing list is not that active.. 
Is there any other mailing list where I can post quests related to SIMPLE ?
 
thanks,
Girish

Girish Vasvani <[email-masked]> wrote:

Hi,

thanks in advance,

Girish

---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
 Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 13:33:06 -0400

responses inline.

> on this mailing list page.

http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-ietf-simple-presence-data-model-05.txt 
has an index, not searchable though.

> 
> 2. Several items were not clear to me while reading "Presence Processing 
> Model" draft from Rosenberg (01 version which is the latest).
> 
>       a. Can Presence Server (PA) provide different presentity status 
> based on who the watcher is ? If yes, is this change made during 
> filtering (Watcher or Privacy) or during composition Or, it's left upto 
> the implementer of PA. Or, PA never makes such change per watcher basis ?

This is one of the things we want to make possible. Exactly how to model 
this - as a composition operation, or as something different, is still 
not decided and probably one of the biggest open issues in the 
processing model. The current authorization policy document really 
covers privacy filtering, and focuses on removing content from a 
consolidated presence document. As such, it says nothing about providing 
different information to different watchers.

I tend to think that we need something else in the model, which allows 
for the user to specify explicit tuples as input for specific watchers, 
and then have the composition policy prefer those tuples as a general rule.

> 
>       b. I'm assuming "Raw Presence Document" in Figure 1 of this draft 
> implies a single such document. Based on individual watchers, PA could 
> generate multiple such presence doc and this step is not performed in 
> "Composition" (sec 4.2.2) !! Please, correct me if I'm wrong here.

Right now, its a single document, and it would be the same for all 
watchers. See above on a suggestion to fix.

> 
> 3. Is it possible for RPID doc to contain activity status codes etc. in 
> UTF-8 form (f.e. to support language codes that are non-English) ?

Yes. There is an element called <other> which takes a freeform string in 
  UTF-8, and also allows the xml:lang attribute to declare its language.

  In
> general, is there guide-line on PIDF/RPID and Multi-language support 
> (sorry, am not quite familiar with XML Schema + Multi-language support 
> either to deduce an answer from respective drafts).

I don't think there is much specific in RPID on handling of 
multi-language support. However, I think whats there works fine. All of 
the various values for the rpid elements - the activities for example - 
are all machine-interpreted tokens, and so can be rendered in a 
localized language as needed. Freeform stuff supports the regular xml 
character sets which are generally utf-8, and we have xml:lang 
definitions for what language it is.

Do you see a specific gap?

Thanks,
Jonathan R.
-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Director, Service Provider VoIP Architecture   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 22:15:34 -0400

> and then have the composition policy prefer those tuples as a general rule.

I would prefer to have the composition policy reflect the desires of the 
presentity and then have a separate processing step that is 
watcher-dependent, but takes place after the privacy filtering. This 
seems to follow the "funnel" model, in that what the watcher sees can 
only be a subset of the composed and privacy-filtered data. For 
efficiency reasons, rules should be done earlier, as they affect more 
watchers if wildcard rules are used.

It might make sense and not add much complexity to allow the watcher to 
request the "raw" (lossless) union-composition output instead of a more 
processed version, subject to presentity consent and privacy filters.

Composition is already fairly messy; making it more difficult by adding 
watcher input seems counter-productive.

Henning

---

From: Yang Zhao <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 16:19:54 +0800

In 3GPP TS 23.141, there is some description as following:
************************************************************************
***
6.1.2	Presence Structure to Support Multiple Values for Attributes
Attributes shall be mapped to separate tuples which have unique
identifiers. If the presentity wants to show different presence
information concerning one attribute to different watchers the
presentity shall create more than one tuple that contain the same
attribute with different value. The association of tuples to different
watchers and watcher groups shall be based on the subscription
authorisation policies. The presentity controls the value of the
attribute by modifying the corresponding tuple. Figure 6.1.2-1
illustrates how different values for different watchers are provided
utilising subscription authorisation policies.
************************************************************************
****

It seems that they use authorization policies to solve this problem.

Yang

------------------------------------
Yang Zhao
Research & Standardization Dept.
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
 
E-mail:[email-masked]
Tel:+86-755-28974124
Fax:+86-755-28975471
------------------------------------

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 代表
Henning Schulzrinne
发送时间: 2005年9月23日 10:16
收件人: Jonathan Rosenberg
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: Re: [Simple] Quests reg Presence Processing Model and RPID..

Henning