[Standards] XMPP team activity
xramtsov at gmail.com
Mon Sep 28 22:00:26 UTC 2015
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 15:16:47 -0600
Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter at andyet.net> wrote:
> You noted several failings in XMPP. There are XEPs out there for
> those features: push, file transfer, message archiving, avatars, etc.
> Part of the problem we have is that sometimes we have two different
> approaches to the same problem, developed at different times. We need
> to be more decisive about moving from old to new. That means we need
> more code for the new solutions.
> Sometimes we're developing solutions to newer problems. Here again
> code helps. Constructive comments on the new solutions is also good.
OK, let's be more specific.
1) Push. There is a problem with IQ responses in a "pushed" session.
Obviously, in such state a client is unable to respond for incoming IQs
and as a consequence some clients like Gajim are indefinitely rendering
progress bar in the user's vcard interface because they are unable to
obtain time and version IQs.
2) File transfer. Those jingle specs don't resolve all the problems I
HTTP Upload is good, but you still need to transfer an URL somehow to
the recipient and there are no normative rules for that. We can
obviously use jabber:x:oob message btw.
3) MAM. Message deletion is still lacking. Note that the deletion
should be also performed via complex requests, like "delete everything
from previous month".
4) Avatars. Gajim is able to render avatars in conferences and
Conversations is not. Kaiwa is fetching avatars via Gravatar. And those
are clients in active development. How is that even possible that we got
avatars broken by 2015? I didn't even delve into the problem, I guess
there is vcard-based avatars vs pubsub avatars problem. How is it
supposed to make a transition from the old spec to the newer one?
Should every new client implement both specs? Isn't it too complex?
> Although I prefer early implementations of extensions that people are
> trying to standardize, sometimes proprietary extensions are helpful
> too in order to gain experience with different ways to solve a
As an example: so I did an extension for ejabberd for image thumbnails,
came here and asked the HTTP Upload author to improve the spec. And got
a response like: "we don't need that":
That is very motivating. So for me implementation before
standardization looks like waste of a time and resources, because you
can always get responses like those.
> I don't mind complaining. I do mind complaining without doing. In
> general you are doing, but in this thread you're just complaining and
> that's not especially constructive. Better to channel your annoyance
> into feedback on, and implementation of, XEP-0357, XEP-0234, XEP-0313
> and XEP-0280, etc. Let's get those finished and implemented and
> deployed so that we solve these important problems!
First of all, all mentioned XEPs are implemented in ejabberd, except
jingle file transfer, obviously. That's not even a problem implementing
something for me, the problems are in clients: there are no clients
present at the moment having all those specs implemented.
More information about the Standards