[Standards] XEP-0384: Rejecting? [Was: Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: Ephemeral Messages]
xmpp at larma.de
Thu Jan 2 13:36:59 UTC 2020
On 1/2/20 2:11 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> We have been specifically told that a particular library is required,
> and that the documentation is not considered sufficient by those
> involved in OMEMO.
Any information that is required beside the documentation and the XEP
can be added to the XEP. That's why the XEP is in Experimental state,
it's not finished and still has pending information. Until now, I am not
aware of anyone trying to implement the OMEMO protocol just from
documentation existing to find out what is missing from the current
documentation. This might be a good reason to move the XEP to deferred,
but not to reject it.
> The diagram is clearly marked as including the possible states, but does
> not describe itself as exhaustive on what state transitions are allowed
> (or "authorised"). Indeed, the Board fairly recently updated that
> diagram to reflect the Council's common practice of bouncing XEPs back
> to Experimental from Proposed rather than only to Draft or Rejected.
The board did not update the diagram alone, it also specifically added a
rule in the text to allow that behavior . If it happened before, it
was behavior outside the rules of XEP-0001.
> The text says:
> A XEP of any type is in the Rejected state if the XMPP Council has
> deemed it unacceptable and has voted to not move it forward within
> the standards process.
You are merely quoting from the description of the Rejected state, it
does not describe when the council is allowed to do so. For a standards
track XEP there is a very accurate specification of the possible state
changes (even outside the diagram):
> The ideal path is for a Standards Track XEP is to be advanced by the XMPP Council from Proposed to Draft to Final (the criteria for this advancement are described in the following paragraphs). However, an Experimental XEP shall be assigned a status of Deferred if it has not been updated in twelve (12) months (e.g., because of a lack of interest or because it depends on other specifications that have yet to move forward). In addition, rather than being advanced from Proposed to Draft, a Standards Track XEP may be voted to a status of Rejected if the XMPP Council deems it unacceptable. (Note that if a XEP is Deferred, the XMPP Extensions Editor may at some point re-assign it to Experimental status, and that, even if a XEP is Rejected, it is retained in source control and on the XMPP Standards Foundation website for future reference.) Finally, (only) a XEP author may voluntarily remove an Experimental XEP from further consideration, resulting in a status of Retracted.
Note how it explicitly says that *only* the XEP author may remove an
Experimental XEP from further consideration. You are trying to do so
without being the XEP author so you are clearly violating this rule.
More information about the Standards