[Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

Mark Rejhon markybox at gmail.com
Sun Aug 19 00:03:04 UTC 2012


On 2012-08-18 6:50 PM, "Gunnar Hellström" <gunnar.hellstrom at omnitor.se>
wrote:
>
> The original issue
>
> "25. "Note: There are no restrictions on using multiple Action Elements
> during a message reset (e.g. typing or backspacing occurring at the
> end of a retransmitted message)." This seems potentially confusing.
> IMHO it would be friendlier for the recipient to process the reset as
> the state of the RTT message at a point in time and for the sender to
> then send additional <rtt/> elements for subsequent modifications.
> (Postel's Law and all that.) However, that's unenforceable so I
> suppose it's OK as-is."
>
> I get the impression that it is confusing to call it retransmission, when
>
> 1. The 'reset' is instead an order to clear the real-time message.
>
> 2. The <rtt/> element may contain new action items, so the term
retransmission does not fit well.
>
>
> That could probably be amended by changing in 4.6.3:
> "A message reset is a retransmission of the sender's partially composed
text. "
>
> To:
>
> "A message reset is a command to clear the real-time message. It may be
followed by transmission of the sender's partially composed text as well as
new text or other action elements."
>
> /Gunnar

To be fair, the event=new also exactly does the same thing -- it also
clears the real-time message, so if I say what you say, I am also
introducing a potential new confusion about the lack of distinction between
event=new and event=reset.  This must be thought out carefully.  Your
revision does not solve confusion without creating a new, separate
confusion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20120818/e907a7a5/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list