[Standards] Business rules of Last Message Correction

Georg Lukas georg at op-co.de
Tue Jun 12 12:12:00 UTC 2018

* Tedd Sterr <teddsterr at outlook.com> [2018-06-11 18:31]:
> That was my original expectation too, but Kev suggested the bump would be preferable.

I don't want to put words in anybody's mouth, but to me it looks like
Kev said it would be better to bump this than to have a second
specification, not that changing this spec needs a bump.

> The protocol itself functionally supports Recent Message Correction
> (RMC) without modification, but without a way to differentiate between
> the two, LMC clients may silently drop RMC messages, rather than
> blindly append them as new messages.

I must admit I didn't saw this as a possible interpretation of LMC. The
business rules indeed don't say what to do with an LMC that violates the
business rules. It was just the most obvious to me to add it as a new
message. I think this is another point that should be clarified in the
XEP. And if there are any clients that actually delete the message if it
has a violating LMC reference, we might actually need a namespace bump.
Still, I hope this is not the case.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20180612/c22427c9/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list