From 8ffbeeb5412fbf7e9fd2706f7f1db34d60641fd8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Diane Trout <diane@ghic.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2017 18:19:09 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] The specification refers to a bare JID but the example was a
 FULLJID

---
 xep-0144.xml | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/xep-0144.xml b/xep-0144.xml
index 034564db..612f017e 100644
--- a/xep-0144.xml
+++ b/xep-0144.xml
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@
   <p>Roster item exchanges can be sent in any of the four following ways:</p>
   <ul>
     <li><p>In an &IQ; stanza to a full JID &LOCALFULL;. This is appropriate if the sender has knowledge (e.g., via presence and &xep0115;) that a particular resource associated with the recipient is online and supports this protocol.</p></li>
-    <li><p>In an &IQ; stanza to a bare JID &LOCALFULL;. This can be appropriate if the sender wants the roster item to be processed by the server on behalf of the recipient (e.g., if the sender is a trusted component of the server).</p></li>
+    <li><p>In an &IQ; stanza to a bare JID &LOCALBARE;. This can be appropriate if the sender wants the roster item to be processed by the server on behalf of the recipient (e.g., if the sender is a trusted component of the server).</p></li>
     <li><p>In a &MESSAGE; stanza to a bare JID &LOCALBARE;. This can be appropriate if the sender wants the roster item to be delivered to all of the recipient's online resources (e.g., because the sender does to have presence or capabilities information about particular resources).</p></li>
     <li><p>In a &MESSAGE; stanza to a full JID &LOCALFULL;. This is generally undesirable, since it is better to se an &IQ; stanza when sending to a full JID (e.g., IQ stanzas are automatically acknowledged).</p></li>
   </ul>