[Standards] Resurrecting Reactions

Marvin W xmpp at larma.de
Tue Dec 3 20:50:47 UTC 2019


Hi everyone,

I'd like to resurrect the Reactions topic.

As you might remember, in July a first XEP was proposed [1]. There was 
some discussion on the mailing list [2] following this proposal. In 
summary there was mainly three concerns:

1. The ProtoXEP does not specify a fallback body and does not use 
XEP-0308. I explained that this was intentionally left unspecified for 
now to gather insights if a fallback body would be beneficial or rather 
hurt adoption.
2. The ProtoXEP defines that reactions can only be a single unicode 
emojis. Some felt that there should be the possibility to have images as 
reactions. This can be addressed later with little changes to the 
proposed protocol. Some also argued that the definition of a single 
unicode emoji depends on the version of Unicode. This is true and cannot 
be resolved without specifying the version of Unicode to be used which 
seems unnecessary for an early Experimental XEP.
3. The ProtoXEP doesn't use a generic way to reference the message that 
is reacted on. However it was agreed that no proper way to do so 
generically existed until then. As a follow-up, the Fastening XEP-0422 
was proposed, with the intention to do some generic referencing thing. 
On this list, this XEP received some critique [3] from me and others 
that were not addressed yet and make it unclear to me how to correctly 
implement Reactions on top of it in various use-cases (updating 
reactions, encryption).

As of now, the reactions XEP remains in the inbox, which means according 
to XEP-0001, it is perceived to be not suited for experimental proof of 
concept implementations. Given that (to my knowledge) there are already 
two proof of concept implementations (Dino, Poezio) and one live/stable 
implementation (Movim) this status hardly describes the reality.

I'd like the council to re-evaluate granting Experimental status to the 
proposed XEP. As per XEP-0001, "the granting of Experimental status must 
not be construed as indicating any level of approval by the XSF, the 
XMPP Council, or the XMPP developer community". If any of the council 
members prefers to refuse granting experimental status at this point, 
please give clear guidance on how to further process bringing this 
feature to XMPP in form of a XEP that can be implemented in practice.

Thanks,
Marvin


[1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html
[2] https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-July/036271.html
[3] https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-September/036418.html


More information about the Standards mailing list