On Mittwoch, 21. August 2019 01:06:07 CEST Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 16:58, Jonas Schäfer <jonas@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@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________