[Standards] Privacy Rules and MAM interaction

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu May 25 11:26:47 UTC 2017


On 20 May 2017 at 17:45, Evgeny Khramtsov <xramtsov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sat, 20 May 2017 11:12:18 -0500
> Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> wrote:
>
>> I was simply advising that making your MAM module interact with
>> privacy lists may be something you want to consider avoiding.
>
> But I simply cannot avoid it. If a user has two connected resources
> with different active lists, what should I do?

Default sounds right, though in practise if the message would be
delivered by the default or any active list, you might as well store
it.

The specification covers this to some degree in the third paragraph of
section 5.1, the guideline being that if a client "would have received
it", it goes into the archive, and if the message is rejected, it
shouldn't go into the archive.

For the XEP-0191 case, that seems straightforward enough, for the
Privacy Lists case it's more complex, but I think Default would do -
though default or any active seems more in line with the intent here.

Dave.


More information about the Standards mailing list