Re: [db-wg] IM contact

[Sascha Lenz <]

Hi,

Sander Steffann wrote:

> > > 	existing 'role' object.  Use of a different word to 
> > describe this
> > > 	hint in the URI field would perhaps make things clearer, thus:
> > >
> > > 	  URI: <purpose (or whatever)> <URI> [optional] [multiple]
> > hmm, why not go with a generic "attribute:" field then and stick all
> > semantics in a free form optional label?
> Well, I think the semantics are clear for this: Make one field type to put
> contact information in, without having to make a different field type for
> every type of communication.
>
> You still have the 'how to contact someone' semantics, without fixing it to
> one type of communication. The alternative (if we want different types of
> contact information) is to add a "sip:" field, an "icq:" field, a "jabber:"
> field, a "skype:" field, etc.
>
> I personally would prefer a single field with a flexible uri than all these
> different types. As long as the semantics of the field remain 'how to
> contact someone' ofcourse.
like i mentioned before, i probably would support a more "standard" 
thing like SIP, and a generic "uri:" option woulnd't be too bad.
I can't say anything against it, no problems. Why not.
The idea is somewhat appealing to me, although i still think, 
phone+email is enough for everyone :-)

But i'm totally against anything like "im:" or even "icq: .. skype:.."
This still sounds stupid. If at all, we should go with the generic 
version to make everyone happy.

--
========================================================================
= Sascha Lenz                  SLZ-RIPE          slz@localhost         =
= Network Operations                                                   =
= BayCIX GmbH, Landshut                  * PGP public Key on demand *  =
========================================================================