[Standards] Council Voting Summary 2019-08-06

Daniel Gultsch daniel at gultsch.de
Thu Aug 29 08:19:39 UTC 2019


Hi,

Am Mi., 7. Aug. 2019 um 16:18 Uhr schrieb Tedd Sterr <teddsterr at outlook.com>:

> VETOED (-1:0:+4)
> Proposed XMPP Extension: Message Reactions - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html
> Dave: +1 (enthusiastic about the problem space, but expect this will need a lot of changes on the way to Draft)
> Georg: +1 (it is good enough for Experimental)
> Jonas: +1 (details can be ironed out)
> Kev: -1 (we need a general way of referencing a previous message for assorted things and to use that everywhere, while the reactions syntax is not reusable)
> Link: +1 (issues can be ironed out before Draft)


just a quick 'imho' from my point of view here.
I get where this veto is coming from. We discussed the need to
collapse meta data around a message within the archive and I totally
agree that long term we need to solve this.
However I find it unfair to put the burden of figuring out a solution
to a very complex problem upon a single XEP (or its authors). Vaguely
pointing to to Message ~References~ Attaching isn’t very helpful
either IMHO as it is not proven to me that this XEP will actually
solve the problem. Furthermore if we ever do collapsing we need to
deal with legacy anyway that is not using the generalized mechanism
(Display markers, delivery receipts, Corrections) adding one more to
that list doesn’t feel like a big deal to me.

cheers
Daniel


More information about the Standards mailing list