Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
* Guus der Kinderen [2019-03-07 09:26]: > I'm very much in favor of not applying changes to the 2019 suite that can > wait for the 2020 edition. Alright, I'm convinced. Let's not further delay XEP-0412, and then let's hope client implementors will move away from the horrible mess that the 0066 hack is until October 2019, so that the problem will have solved itself by then. Georg signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
I'm very much in favor of not applying changes to the 2019 suite that can wait for the 2020 edition. On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 08:39, Daniel Gultsch wrote: > Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 21:07 Uhr schrieb Georg Lukas : > > Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images > > > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > > > > > > > While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images, > > and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is > > something that client developers should know about, at least to > > implement it on the receiving side. > > Independently of whether or not you want the Compliance Suite to > become a document describing the quirks of a particular client (which > I don’t think is a good idea) I'd wait with those modifications for > the 2020 compliance suite. > Just get the 2019 out now and then start working on 2020. > > That’s the thing about the compliance suites. There will always be one > more new thing that should be documented. But at some point we will > have to decide that we are done for the year. That's why we are > planning on doing this every year. > > For the future I'd actually suggest that we do some kind of 'feature > freeze' in ~October and then spend the remainder of the year clearing > up the wording and getting it to Draft. > > cheers > Daniel > ___ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org > ___ > ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
XEP-0385 is a travesty. On Thu, 7 Mar 2019, 12:09 Timothée Jaussoin, wrote: > What about using a proper XEP like SIMS ( > https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0385.html) for that case? > > This look like a hack to me. > Le 06/03/2019 à 22:05, Georg Lukas a écrit : > > * Tedd Sterr [2019-03-06 > 21:30]: > > Naysayers are invited to comment now, or forever hold their piece. > > because I love to be the naysayer, here is one: > > "Modern" clients are using a small subset of XEP-0066, namely §3, to > communicate inline images in messages. A small subset of those clients, > furthermore, requires the value to be equal to the message > for this to work, apparently to enforce compatibility with legacy > clients. > > Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > > > While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images, > and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is > something that client developers should know about, at least to > implement it on the receiving side. > > > Georg > > > ___ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org > ___ > > ___ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org > ___ > ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
Hi, I think there is some confusion about the use of 0066. We do not communicate that an image should be shown inline. It is a hacky way of communicating that the URL links to a file that was specifically uploaded by a user, or a user wants to share. This is so clients can differentiate between random links a user found on the internet and posts into a chat and uploaded content from the user. The first could lead to users accidentally sending dangerous files to their contacts if we automatically download it and show it inline. So we add a oob tag to the message to tell other clients this file was uploaded by the user (or a deliberate action to share some content) and not some copy paste link. If the client acts on this information differently is up to the client. So because we make uploads known with 0066 (Which is what this XEP is for to deliberately share a URL), we have to also think about clients not supporting 0066 and that leads to putting the url also into the body. 385 adds more metadata than 0066, but other than that it does exactly the same. regards Philipp Am Do., 7. März 2019 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Timothée Jaussoin < edhe...@movim.eu>: > What about using a proper XEP like SIMS ( > https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0385.html) for that case? > > This look like a hack to me. > ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 21:07 Uhr schrieb Georg Lukas : > Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg > > > > While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images, > and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is > something that client developers should know about, at least to > implement it on the receiving side. Independently of whether or not you want the Compliance Suite to become a document describing the quirks of a particular client (which I don’t think is a good idea) I'd wait with those modifications for the 2020 compliance suite. Just get the 2019 out now and then start working on 2020. That’s the thing about the compliance suites. There will always be one more new thing that should be documented. But at some point we will have to decide that we are done for the year. That's why we are planning on doing this every year. For the future I'd actually suggest that we do some kind of 'feature freeze' in ~October and then spend the remainder of the year clearing up the wording and getting it to Draft. cheers Daniel ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
What about using a proper XEP like SIMS (https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0385.html) for that case? This look like a hack to me. Le 06/03/2019 à 22:05, Georg Lukas a écrit : * Tedd Sterr [2019-03-06 21:30]: Naysayers are invited to comment now, or forever hold their piece. because I love to be the naysayer, here is one: "Modern" clients are using a small subset of XEP-0066, namely §3, to communicate inline images in messages. A small subset of those clients, furthermore, requires the value to be equal to the message for this to work, apparently to enforce compatibility with legacy clients. Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images, and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is something that client developers should know about, at least to implement it on the receiving side. Georg ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___ ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
Re: [Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
* Tedd Sterr [2019-03-06 21:30]: > Naysayers are invited to comment now, or forever hold their piece. because I love to be the naysayer, here is one: "Modern" clients are using a small subset of XEP-0066, namely §3, to communicate inline images in messages. A small subset of those clients, furthermore, requires the value to be equal to the message for this to work, apparently to enforce compatibility with legacy clients. Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images, and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is something that client developers should know about, at least to implement it on the receiving side. Georg -- || http://op-co.de ++ GCS d--(++) s: a C+++ UL+++ !P L+++ !E W+++ N ++ || gpg: 0x962FD2DE || o? K- w---() O M V? PS+ PE-- Y++ PGP+ t+ 5 R+ || || Ge0rG: euIRCnet || X(+++) tv+ b+(++) DI+++ D- G e h- r++ y? || ++ IRCnet OFTC OPN ||_|| signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
[Standards] Is the World Ready for Compliance Suites 2019?
The Last Call (https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-February/035770.html) ended on 2019-02-29 (a non-existent date, but it would still be over) and there were zero replies. So, aside from cries of "get on with it, already!", does this mean all are satisfied with its current state, there are no further changes needed, and it's as ready as it's ever going to be? If that's the case, it can be voted into the reputable status of 'Draft' next week. Naysayers are invited to comment now, or forever hold their piece. ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org ___
