[Standards] Comments on Chat Markers

Philipp Hancke fippo at goodadvice.pages.de
Thu Jul 4 12:04:09 UTC 2013


Am 04.07.2013 12:45, schrieb Kevin Smith:
> 2) It seems to me that this proposal is providing users with the
> highest assurance of delivery ("This message has been read and
> acknowledged by the user"), when it's possible that some of the
> acknowledged messages were never delivered. This seems serious to me
> in situations like:
>
> <User A> Something terrible has happened, please send help.
> [S2S blips, message gets lost]
> <User A> There's high winds here.
> [S2S is back, message gets delivered]
> User B now acknowledges the 'high winds' message as read.
> Because of the 'up to this point' nature of the proposal, User A has
> now had it acknowledged that User B has read the message about needing
> to send assistance.

That is a more general problem. Once you cross the s2s boundary, the 
tcp-like property that a party that gets messages A and C has also 
received B does not hold anymore. 0198 partially helps so that you are 
able to recover and resend B, at the cost of mixing up the order on the 
recipient side.



More information about the Standards mailing list