Service invitation standard

Olivier Goffart ogoffart at
Thu Oct 21 23:19:04 EEST 2004

Le Jeudi 21 Octobre 2004 21:27, Rob Kaper a écrit :
> On Thursday 21 October 2004 8:09pm, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > I suppose this is just one of the potential ways of
> > using such a standard. Wouldnt it be better to have
> > this in generic way using dbus or possibly a layer
> > over it like galago?.

The idea was originaly to place this in KIMProxy,  which is a dcop interface 
to comunique with IM clients. It's just a bit older than galago, and uses 
Dcop insteads of DBus.

Maybe, there will be some  KIMProxy <=> galago bridges later.
KIMProxy has the advantage to don't require server.

> True, and if the standard is a good one, it won't matter if the transport
> is D-BUS, DCOP or handled through interfaces with Jabber/XMPP, MSN and the
> likes.

MSN Messenger had already a "standard" (should we call this a standard?) to 
invite to uses some applications.  It's based on an application identifier.

It is described here:  (that protocol is 
now obsolete, but i think the new one still follow the same rules )

The problem i see is that theses applications ID looks like MS Windows 
specifics things.

I don't know possibles Jabber JEP which could handle that.

I realy don't see how we could decide what "applications id" to what 
application, and make this works for every protocol which supports this (at 
least MSN and Jabber) 

> > I am not sure whether kde has decided to adopt dbus or
> > not or whether you would like to have it no dependant
> > on dbus for one reason or the other
> Well, for my purpose D-BUS alone doesn't seem too useful. Game invitations
> are only useful to send to remote desktops of which the users are actually
> "online", so instant messaging will be involved here. VNC invitations are
> often sent through e-mail. I don't care if the interface itself will use
> D-BUS, though. At this point KDE's instant messaging interface uses DCOP,
> but if that changes it should not change my application much if the
> interface for me remains similar.

 Application  <==>  DBus or DCOP  <==>  IM Client    

the fact it is DBus or DCop which is used doesn't matter so much.  They are 
verry similar.

The problem is specialy on the   Application <---> IM Client   specifications.
What do they need to exchange to invite the other contact to use an 
application  (Game / Desktop sharing / Video chat )  
And how to stay protocol independent.

> What I'm looking looking for specifically is a file type standard which can
> be used so communication applications can be fully integrated in common
> application tasks a user will want to accomplish. In my case, playing a
> game with a friend who is on-line. Or e-mailing a client a VNC link.
> Something like application/x-service-invitation seems like the most elegant
> solution.

> I think what you and Daniel are talking about is a way for a KDE
> application to get IM statuses from GAIM. If that's so I'm glad that's on
> the map, because I suppose what I'm looking for builds on it, allowing
> users to use their communication interfaces for more than showing an
> on-line icon in their mail client or a picture of their spouse in a panel
> applet when he/she comes on-line.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the xdg mailing list