Good afternoon.
I am interested to know of a valid URI for XEP-0248.
Would this be a valid URI?
xmpp:comments.hostname?;node=node_collection/node_leaf;item=item_id
Kind regards,
Schimon
Good day.
Previously, we have discussed about comments node over PEP.
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0277.html#comment_add
> Note: A comments node SHOULD be located at a generic
> publish-subscribe node that is not attached to a user's IM account,
> but MAY be located at a personal eventing (PEP) node.
While PEP nodes are only accessible to the account owner, it is desired
to have people to post items to PEP comments node.
I would advise to utilize XLink as a mean of references to moderators
and by that, it would be possible to create a uniform comment
moderation mechanism for posting comments of Atom Over XMPP (XEP-0277
and XEP-0472).
https://www.w3.org/TR/xlink11/
Kind regards,
Schimon
Good day. Ladies and Gentlemen.
I am exploring the specification XLL (XLink).
XLink (XML Linking Language) allows to define links within an XML
document;
It provides a standard way for specifying relationships between
resources, such as documents or elements in those documents; and
This can be helpful when working with large and complex data sets, where
maintaining connections between different parts becomes crucial.
An excerpt from an article of Mr. Hank Simon.
> XLink, a language that dramatically extends the capabilities of
> linking documents well beyond the abilities of mere HTML internet
> pages.
> XLink enables bidirectional linking, multiway linking, and
> out-of-line linking. Bidirectional linking is simply the idea of
> visiting an internet page and returning to the starting point by
> clicking on the same link again. Multiway linking is the
> implementation of Web rings by using XLink.
I was wondering whether XLink could be utilized for forwarded messages
and perhaps for other purposes or situations that may require more
elaborated solutions such as bidirectional linking.
Kind regards,
Schimon
[CC'ing standards@, as I'd like to engage the community regarding our
usage of Github]
On 07/08/2025 18.50, E.M. wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> hereby I will post on today's Board Meeting. Ref: https://wiki.xmpp.org/
> web/Board-Meeting-2025
>
> We have a two items to vote for, too. Please clearly indicate how (+1,
> 0, -1) and on what you are voting (topic).
>
> Furthermore, we are proposing to have another Board meeting in one week at
> Thursday, 14 Aug 2025
> Time: 16:00 UTC / 18:00 CEST
> (Can anyone update the calendar if we agree here?)
>
> Please comment if there are any other topics or input on the items.
>
> Cheers,
> Eddie
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> * XEP-0001 and 0143 changes need approval from Board
> ** Call to provide you input to the changes and place a comment or review.
> Link 1: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1412
This contains some good changes, like the advise to read, understand,
and agree to our IPR. However, I find the the strong emphasis on Github
PRs very problematic. Especially the part where we tell people that if
they don't have a github account and are not willing to sign up for one,
they should find someone who has one.
The XSF should not require the usage of a propriety service for
contributions.
On the other side, I do acknowledge that using a CI-based system for
contributions has its advantage. Therefore, a change which mentions that
we also accept contributions via Github, outlining the existence of a CI
there, would be acceptable to me.
But it is my strong believe that we should always accept contributions
via mail.
Therefore -1, as is.
On a side note: We may also want to point out that it is possible to
validate changes locally. And we probably should look into codeforge
alternatives. But that is outside of the scope of this PR.
> Link 2: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1407
+1, thanks for writing this.
> Link 3: ?
Do we have this link by now?
> * Update on Fiscal Hosting
> ** Background: The platform we have been using for fiscal hosting is to
> begin moving to a new pricing structure in January, and this affects us.
> Details: https://pricing-2026.opencollective.com/
> *** Votes: The XSF Board votes to close the fiscal hosting offering via
> Open Collective without replacement and asks the community to suggest
> alternatives instead of publishing a survey.
+1, as per Matt's analysis, opencollective seems to be to expensive for us.
> * Confusion in protocol name (XMTP)
> ** Background: See Board mailing list
> ** Comment: We don't see that we can do much about it, as XMPP is not a
> trademark and they are already aware.
I think there is not much we can do after the fact.
> * Propose Gonzalo Nemmi (gnemmi) to become member of the XSF CommTeam
> ** Background: Gonzalo is publishing and providing great efforts along
> the team and work well with the XSF and Community. This deserves
> recognition.
> ** Votes: The XSF Board votes that if Gonzalo Nemmi (gnemmi) will be
> accepted as XSF member,
I don't think Board is the right body to approve new members.
> that Gonzalo Nemmi (gnemmi) can join the XSF
> CommTeam.
+1, assuming they fulfill the prerequisites (e.g., being an XSF member).
> ** Comment: Jcbrand will be unlisted after not responding but is always
> welcome to support and comeback.
Thanks for your work JC!
- Flow
Good day.
I realize that PEP is a form of PubSub for accounts.
I do want to know whether it is feasible for an account to create a PEP
node which other accounts can post items to it.
Please advise.
Kind regards,
Schimon
Version 1.2.3 of XEP-0167 (Jingle RTP Sessions) has been released.
Abstract:
This specification defines a Jingle application type for negotiating
one or more sessions that use the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP)
to exchange media such as voice or video. The application type
includes a straightforward mapping to Session Description Protocol
(SDP) for interworking with SIP media endpoints.
Changelog:
Make 'ssrc' attribute 'xs:unsignedInt' (32-bit) instead of 'xs:string'
to match RFC3550. (lnj)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0167.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 0.4.0 of XEP-0455 (Service Outage Status) has been released.
Abstract:
This document defines an XMPP protocol extension that enables server
administrators to communicate issues with the server to all users in a
semantic manner.
Changelog:
Remove leftover pubsub references, add accessibility considerations.
(mp)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0455.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 1.0.4 of XEP-0388 (Extensible SASL Profile) has been released.
Abstract:
This document describes a replacement for the SASL profile documented
in RFC 6120 which allows for greater extensibility.
Changelog:
Schema should use all instead of sequence (dg)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 0.3.0 of XEP-0317 (Hats) has been released.
Abstract:
This specification defines a more extensible model for roles and
affiliations in Multi-User Chat rooms.
Changelog:
Add hat creation and detruction flows; add hue optional parameter; add
chatroom presence hats broadcast; complete disco#info; clarify how the
service should broadcast updated hats; typos; standardize the form
fields; (tj)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0317.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
