[Standards] XEP-0313: Treatment of type=groupchat in user archive with or without <store/> hint

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Mon Nov 27 17:41:51 UTC 2017

On 24 Nov 2017, at 16:36, Georg Lukas <georg at op-co.de> wrote:
> * Kevin Smith <kevin.smith at isode.com> [2017-11-23 18:33]:
>> On 23 Nov 2017, at 17:11, Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> wrote:
>>> For me it doesn't ever make sense to store type=groupchat messages in
>>> the user archive.
> I agree with that. We shouldn't make MAM more complicated, and we should
> specify that MAM should not ever return type=groupchat messages when
> queried (or maybe even that it should not store them).

Saying it shouldn’t store them isn’t helpful, but I’m ok with not returning them by default. We can add further filtering in other XEPs, I think.

>> The main use case for having gc messages in the archive is “I remember
>> I saw someone say something interesting about X, so now I’m going to
>> search my archive for X to find it”, which really needs to have all
>> the messages you’ve seen available, rather than splitting them between
>> multiple sources, some of which won’t support MAM.
> For search, I think it would be better to define a separate mechanism
> where the client can query the archive, and the archive can (if it wants
> to) search whatever messages it has stored internally, but not return
> those messages to normal MAM queries.

Yes, this seems ok, we have MAM search working fine already, so allowing it to return messages that wouldn’t be returned by a default query seems ok.

> I really can't see a search implementation that first downloads the full
> archive to the client and then searches locally.

I’m missing the relevance of that comment, sorry.


More information about the Standards mailing list