[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0313 (Message Archive Management)

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Mon Jun 13 10:50:15 UTC 2016


> On 13 Jun 2016, at 11:49, Kevin Smith <kevin.smith at isode.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 13 Jun 2016, at 11:41, Matthew Wild <mwild1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On 12 June 2016 at 12:39, Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I'm bumping this thread since it hasn't yielded too many responses since I
>>> originally voiced my concerns.
>>> 
>>> To briefly summarize the matter again.
>>> 1) XEP-0313 Section 5.1.2 describes a way for a server to inject the
>>> original / real jid into MUC messages.
>>> 2) This is a very useful addition to the spec in principal, however…
>>> 3) As a client I can't trust this information without a namespace bump.
>>> 
>>> This means I would love to implement this in my client but I can't.
>>> 
>>> So I would strongly suggest to bump the namespace on MAM ASAP. However
>>> bumping namespaces is not something we should do lightly and we should
>>> consider doing other changes as well like the stanza-ids that have been
>>> proposed over a year ago and are generally considered a good idea?
>> 
>> I have a new version of XEP-0313 nearly ready to submit. One of the
>> open questions is whether to bump the namespace or not. I was
>> originally leaning towards not. However, if we do, there are some
>> extra small improvements we can make. I'll review your concerns (which
>> weren't already on my list of issues until now, so thanks for
>> re-raising them), and merge them into the new revision (which I'm
>> expecting to be the last before Draft).
>> 
>> Meanwhile if anyone else has an opinion on this to share, now is the time.
> 
> What are the improvements if we bump?

(*other* improvements)



More information about the Standards mailing list