10 Jul
2024
10 Jul
'24
1:08 p.m.
Hello!
Section 9.4 of XEP-0045 Multi-User Chat defines XMPP interaction when a
member of a room gets their membership removed. In the last few lines of
the section, the section describes how, in a members-only room, the
affected user is to be removed from the room.
Why does example 128 "Service Removes Non-Member" contain two stanzas
(their difference only being a 'actor' element)? See
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128
Kind regards,
Guus
10 Jul
10 Jul
10:44 p.m.
On 7/10/24 5:08 AM, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
Hello!
Section 9.4 of XEP-0045 Multi-User Chat defines XMPP interaction when a
member of a room gets their membership removed. In the last few lines of
the section, the section describes how, in a members-only room, the
affected user is to be removed from the room.
Why does example 128 "Service Removes Non-Member" contain two stanzas
(their difference only being a 'actor' element)? See
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128
<https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128>
I think the we should have only once presence stanza in that example.
IMHO it could include the actor element and the text above the example
could say that the presence stanza MAY include the actor element. (In a
members-only room, the actor element might be useful - "membership has
its privileges" and that privilege is being taken away.)
Peter
11 Jul
11 Jul
12:35 p.m.
Thanks Peter,
A change to the specifications as per your suggestion has been prepared
here: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1362
Kind regards,
Guus
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 10:44 PM Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter(a)stpeter.im>
wrote:
On 7/10/24 5:08 AM, Guus der Kinderen wrote:
Hello!
Section 9.4 of XEP-0045 Multi-User Chat defines XMPP interaction when a
member of a room gets their membership removed. In the last few lines of
the section, the section describes how, in a members-only room, the
affected user is to be removed from the room.
Why does example 128 "Service Removes Non-Member" contain two stanzas
(their difference only being a 'actor' element)? See
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128
<https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128>
I think the we should have only once presence stanza in that example.
IMHO it could include the actor element and the text above the example
could say that the presence stanza MAY include the actor element. (In a
members-only room, the actor element might be useful - "membership has
its privileges" and that privilege is being taken away.)
Peter
99
days inactive
100
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Guus der Kinderen -
Peter Saint-Andre