[Standards-JIG] NEW: Message Archiving

David Yitzchak Cohen lists+jabber_standards at bigfatdave.com
Sun Jun 6 02:32:37 UTC 2004

On Sat, Jun 05, 2004 at 10:20:33PM EDT, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Saturday 05 June 2004 7:06 pm, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:23:47PM EDT, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> > > Version 0.1 of JEP-0136 (Message Archiving) is now available; this
> > > proposal defines a "storage protocol and common disk format for
> > > archiving of messages":
> > >
> > >    http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0136.html
> >
> > If I'm reading the JEP correctly, we're not storing the actual timestamps
> > of individual messages.  Did I miss some discussion on this issue,
> > or did the question simply never come up?
> Good point.  I think using x:delay could suffice here.  Currently, the JEP 
> doesn't go into any detail about what is allowed in a saved message stanza, 
> but the implication is that anything is allowed, including timestamps.
> However, it might be worth making a list of required message elements.  My 
> votes go to body and x:delay.

Isn't x:delay allowed in the original message?

If so, we'd be losing info by clobbering it (assuming the original
and our proposed aren't identical, which will probably happen due to
network conditions).  Maybe we should enclose messages in wrappers
(<item>s, maybe?) giving some basic context?  (My votes would go to (a)
some indication of whether this message was from you or to you, and (b)
a timestamp in x:delay style.)

 - Dave

Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor?
It's simple, Skyler.  You've seen what food processors do to food, right?

Please visit this link:
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20040605/5a5053f5/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list