I would always prefer stable identifier. If it is OK to 'leak' the
real jid I’d prefer to use that. In MIX channels I’d be OK with using
the stable id that MIX provides. But semi anon mucs and their unstable
nicks are a pain. I don’t want to join as 'daniel' and get
notifications about historic mentions of another 'daniel'
Somewhat related; I had the issue in Conversations the other day where
someone joined a muc as 'user' and had historic messages show up as
sent by him that were really send by another 'user'. I’m really
looking forward to having stable ids in MIX.
cheers
Daniel
P.S.: In regards to actually rewording of that XEP and to make it
agnostic towards MIX vs MUC it should probably mention that people
should prefer 'a stable JID if available' where 'available' includes
'safe to leak'
Am Do., 7. März 2019 um 08:47 Uhr schrieb JC Brand :
>
> Hi everyone
>
> In section 3.2 of XEP-0372, the groupchat example includes the real JID of the
> participant, instead of their room JID.
>
> See https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0372.html#usecase_mention
>
> For anonymous or semi-anonymous rooms this is a privacy leak.
>
> Is there any particular reason why the room JID is not used, and is there a
> use-case where one would want to NOT use the room JID, but instead use the
> real
> JID of the participant?
>
> Regards
> JC
> ___
> 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
___
