[Standards] XEP-0184: <received/> vs. <displayed/> vs. <read/>

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Wed Jun 16 18:28:15 UTC 2010


On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> On 6/16/10 12:21 PM, Yann Leboulanger wrote:
>> On 06/16/2010 08:15 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Peter
>>> Saint-Andre<stpeter at stpeter.im>  wrote:
>>>> I just had an interesting conversation with "yagiza" about XEP-0184,
>>>> which he has said I can paste here. The general idea is: do we need
>>>> something in XEP-0184 to indicate that a message has been read by the
>>>> intended recipient? This would be similar to the<displayed/>  element in
>>>> XEP-0022. I'm not convinced that we need this feature in XEP-0184, and
>>>> tried to explain why to yagiza. Further discussion is welcome on this
>>>> list. I've attached the log of my chat with yagiza for context.
>>>
>>> The text already says that the receipt isn't sent until the message is
>>> presented to the user, which seems to be exactly the behaviour
>>> discussed - that the message was in the window the user had selected
>>> at the time. So the XEP already covers this.
>>>
>>> What it doesn't cover is acking messages as soon as the client has
>>> received them and before they're presented to the user -  we have 198
>>> to do exactly that.
>>
>> It's not what I understood from this XEP, and it's not what is
>> implemented in Gajim.
>>
>> Requirements says "Enable a sender to request notification that an XMPP
>> message stanza has been received." received here doesn't mean displayed
>> IMHO.
>
> I agree with Yann and disagree with Kev.
>
> received does not mean displayed

Agreed.

> displayed does not mean read

Agreed.

> displayed *might mean* marked-as read

Agreed.

But the last one:
"presented" does mean "displayed".

/K



More information about the Standards mailing list