The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP.
Title: GRE Encrypter: OpenPGP
Abstract:
This GRE Encrypter uses OpenPGP to encrypt payload.
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/gre-encrypter-openpgp.html
The Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept this
proposal as an official XEP.
The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP.
Title: GRE Formatter: MIME
Abstract:
This GRE Formatter uses Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME)
to format payload.
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/gre-formatter-mime.html
The Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept this
proposal as an official XEP.
[[Zombie Thread!!]
On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 at 17:51, Jonas Schäfer <jonas(a)wielicki.name> wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 21. August 2019 01:06:07 CEST Dave Cridland wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 16:58, Jonas Schäfer <jonas(a)wielicki.name> wrote:
> > > On Dienstag, 20. August 2019 10:34:22 CEST Dave Cridland wrote:
> > > > > *PR #808 - XEP-0045: Add Tags configuration and metadata* -
> > > > > https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/808
> > > > > Dave: [pending]
> > > > > Georg: [on-list]
> > > > > Jonas: +1
> > > > > Kev: [pending]
> > > > > Link: [on-list]
> > > >
> > > > I think I'm -1 on this. I don't think that having tags is a bad
> idea, in
> > > > and of itself, but I'm concerned with adding more stuff to XEP-0045.
> > > >
Note that I didn't say "adding more stuff to MUC". Fine with adding more
stuff to MUC, but XEP-0045 ought to be Final by now, and adding yet more
functionality to XEP-0045 isn't going to help that. I'm not sure this
change really satisfies the spirit of Stable either.
On top of that, re-reading the proposal, yes - it's just too simplistic. So
even if we did put it in XEP-0045 (or rather, ram it on the side with some
glue, string, and sticky-backed plastic for speed) I think it'd eventually
end up with more development and that would again affect the status of
XEP-0045.
>
> > > > In general, I think that tagging in this "dumb" way is probably never
> > >
> > > going
> > >
> > > > to be enough, and a more considered approach might be better.
> > > >
> > > > For what it's worth, I'm open to having my mind changed on this.
> > >
> > > As someone in favour of this, what do you consider "dumb" about this?
> >
> > Dumb as in the tags are simply "there", and therefore only of use to an
> > external search engine, really.
> >
> > So things you can't do are filter by tag on a disco#items search, say, or
> > assign some internal meaning to specific tags for state management or
> > workflow or something.
> >
> > Put another way, I'm not sure this gives anything to build upon - it's
> just
> > a field of strings, and there's no indication of semantics or intended
> use
> > here. I can implement it easily enough from the spec, but I have no idea
> > how to use it beyond "put some strings here".
> >
> > Quite a lot of '45 is like this already, and I'd rather not make things
> > worse.
>
> Fair enough. Do you have a proposal with which we could provide a similar
> UX
> to users?
>
Yeah, sorry, I didn't reply to this. Well, better (5 years) late than never!
Put the tagging in a different specification, and either make a registry
for the tag names, or make the tags URIs (or namespaced by URIs) so they
can be more safely permissionless. Pubsub nodes could probably be taggable
too, via possibly the same mechanism.
Once you've done this, then adding search-by-tag seems possible (and even
sensible), and we can add additional semantics to particular tags safely.
The most obvious thing to do would be to add a XEP-0128 form which just
holds tags, make the tags URIs, and make a URI prefix that means "these are
plaintext human-readable tags" - but you could of course do the tag prefix
URI within the field name instead.
Dave.
>
> kind regards,
> Jonas_______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe(a)xmpp.org
> _______________________________________________
>
Le mercredi 8 janvier 2025 20:07:04 heure normale d’Europe centrale, vous avez écrit :
> On 1/8/25 9:49 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > On 1/8/25 9:43 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >> On 1/8/25 4:08 AM, Goffi wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I'm very interested in XEP-0284, and there is this PR from Link Mauve
> >>> buried for years to revive it:
> >>> https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/904
> >>>
> >>> I would like to put that on council agenda, but I have the following
> >>> question:
> >>>
> >>> - are the previous author still unreachable? I'll put their address
> >>> as recipients of this email.
> >>
> >> I am connected to Tom on LinkedIn and Joonas is there too but I'm not
> >> connected to him. If it's important, I can track them down.
> >
> > P.S. I have forwarded this note to a non-bouncing email address for Joonas.
>
> I heard back from Joonas and he is reachable but doesn't have the time
> to contribute and doesn't feel that he needs to be consulted. However,
> he's excited that people are still working on SXE. :-)
>
> Peter
Great, thanks Peter!
This email was sent only to me, I believe by mistake, I'm replying to standard@ as I think that it is valuable information for the Council,
OK, Link Mauve is currently unresponsive, let's wait and see if he's still interested in taking over (otherwise, I can take care of it, but I hope that Link Mauve is still willing to push it to stable).
Best,
Goffi
Version 0.3.0 of XEP-0421 (Occupant identifiers for semi-anonymous
MUCs) has been released.
Abstract:
This specification defines a method that allows clients to identify a
MUC participant across reconnects and renames. It thus prevents
impersonification of semi-anonymous users.
Changelog:
* Adjust wording to use semi-anonymous or pseudonymous instead of
anonymous
* Explicitly mention issues arising from occupant id matching across
rooms
* Add example with server secret instead of room secret
* Add some pseudocode (lmw)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0421.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.
Hello,
I'm very interested in XEP-0284, and there is this PR from Link Mauve buried for years to revive it:
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/904
I would like to put that on council agenda, but I have the following question:
- are the previous author still unreachable? I'll put their address as recipients of this email.
- Peter Saint-Andre is still around as the XSF Treasurer. So Peter could you tell us if you agree with this PR and with Link Mauve taking over the XEP?
- Link Mauve, are you still OK with this PR and being an author of this specification?
If all 3 above give green lights, Daniel would you mind adding this to Coucil agenda?
Thank you all!
Best,
Goffi
Good day.
I would want your advise concerning project Blasta, an annotation
system based on XMPP.
The project Blasta https://blasta.woodpeckersnest.eu/ is utilizing the
specification Atom Over XMPP, and has insentivise me to think of a new
XEP that be similar to XEP-0277 (Libervia) and XEP-0472 (Movim), which
is the same without the content field.
Yet the discussion to standartize bookmark structure at the buku project
https://github.com/jarun/buku/discussions/795 and the structure which is
used by the linkding bookmark project https://demo.linkding.link/bookmarks
which does include a content field with the markdown format, which is
what Movim does, has led me to think of supporting the field "content"
of Atom Syndication Format.
Further, the publishing project Postmill https://postmill.xyz/ works
very similarly to bookmarks and forum systems, so comments, which
are part of XEP-0277 (Libervia) and XEP-0472 (Movim) are also valid.
Hence, I think that Blasra needs to be compatible with XEP-0277
(Libervia) and XEP-0472 (Movim) albeit its main purpose is to manage
bookmarks.
Please write your thoughts about this matter.
Kind regards,
Schimon
Good day to one and all!
I have been contemplating the idea of utilizing PubSub as a platform to
synchronize browser bookmarks, history and tabs. See article "XMPP For
Browsers" at The XMPP Newsletter of November 2024.
I have received crucial criticism by the Pale Moon developers due to
neglegence of encryption. It is not in my intention to neglegence
encryption, yet I do not intend to add encryption before a working
prototype.
Schimon:
> > There is no storage encryption yet. I do not know whether it is
> > necessary
Moonchild:
> Unacceptable.
> Nobody but the end user should be able to access the stored data.
> Encryption is required, and encryption should be set up in such a way
> that nobody aside from the end user (not even the server admin) has
> access to this data. Storing everything in plaintext in an XMPP
> service instance is ridiculous.
That said, the owner of the server must not have any access to the data.
However, I am thinking of encrypting the data, yet I do not how to
implement such system which will be possible to decrypt only by the
owner of the data, and I also do not know how to handle a situation in
which an encryption key was lost.
Links:
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=31900https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/woodpeckersnest.space/~schapps/journal/2024-1…
gemini://woodpeckersnest.space/~schapps/journal/2024-11-28-xmpp-for-browsers.gmi
https://xmpp.org/2024/12/the-xmpp-newsletter-november-2024/
Happy new year!
Schimon
Hi,
as a member of the SCAM Team¹ I’m proud to announce that the 27th XMPP
Summit will take place on Thursday January 30th and Friday January
31st 2025 in Brussels, Belgium.
As usual we picked the two days before FOSDEM² takes place in the same city.
https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Conferences/Summit_27
If you are planning on coming please sign up on the wiki. (We have
somewhat limited capacity)
If you are unsure if the Summit is right for you, I (not in my
capacity as a member of the SCAM team) wrote a short thread on
Mastodon describing what the Summit typically looks like:
https://gultsch.social/@daniel/113385481055735606
See you in Brussels!
cheers
Daniel
¹: Summits Conferences & Meetups Team https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/scam-team/
²: https://fosdem.org/2025/
