[Standards] XEP-0384: Rejecting? [Was: Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: Ephemeral Messages]

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu Jan 2 15:39:43 UTC 2020

On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 at 15:34, Marvin W <xmpp at larma.de> wrote:

> On 1/2/20 4:08 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> > You keep conflating the notion that OMEMO is incomplete with the notion
> > that it is not possible to create an unencumbered implementation. These
> > are entirely distinct concepts.
> As I said, I am certain that it is possible to create an unencumbered
> implementation if the missing parts of the documentation are added. So
> this conflation absolutely makes sense.
> Just so you are aware: I considered to do an new implementation for Dino
> because I don't really like the libsignal. I decided against it because
> it would be a lot of work with little advantage for Dino - and guess
> what, I am not paid for this work.
> If you know anyone willing to do a unencumbered implementation, I hereby
> offer to provide all the information that is not yet available under the
> public domain and free of charge as it is found to be missing.
> But don't claim without any proof that it is inherently impossible to
> implement something that is fully compatible with the current OMEMO XEP
> without relying on libsignal. Thanks.

So I should accept your assertion that it is possible, but not Philip's
assertion on this list that it is not?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200102/585d2d6f/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list