[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0245 (The /me Command)
dave at cridland.net
Wed Jan 7 21:37:17 UTC 2009
(Well, this one was easy).
On Wed Jan 7 21:29:32 2009, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol
> stack or to clarify an existing protocol?
I think it is certainly needed to document an existing practise.
> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the
> introduction and requirements?
The specification claims to document recommended handling, and I
believe achieves this.
> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If
> not, why not?
N/A - Server Developer, sorry. I note that the specification is
> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?
The only security issue I can think of is if the presentation could
be used to spoof a message from another participant, or from the
Typically, clients display messages on exit such as "dwd has left",
or "dwd has join the group chat" - it may be useful to alert
implementors to ensuring that such messages cannot be spoofed by the
user typing "/me has left", thus - perhaps - avoiding being kicked.
This is the reason, I believe, behind the recommendation (and typical
implementation) of prepending the nickname with a "*".
> 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?
It seems accurate, and clear.
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
More information about the Standards