4 Mar 2020 4:36:08 pm Kevin Smith :
> On 26 Feb 2020, at 17:24, Jonas Schäfer < jo...@wielicki.name
> [mailto:jo...@wielicki.name] > wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support
On 26 Feb 2020, at 17:24, Jonas Schäfer wrote:
>
> On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support querying for an
>> archive similar to how it's done with XEP-0313.
>>
>> tl;dr Can querying archives on non-own,
On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support querying for an
> archive similar to how it's done with XEP-0313.
>
> tl;dr Can querying archives on non-own, non-MUC, non-pubsub JID for
> 1:1 chats be standardized? Can
On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
> (Also, random thought: seeing XEP-0313 lapse into 'Deferred' is
> concerning...)
Actually, XEP-0313 is on the Council’s Short List for Last Call issuing (the
step which leads to advancement to Draft). And as Paul says, indeed,
> (Also, random thought: seeing XEP-0313 lapse into 'Deferred' is concerning...)
The deferred state doesn't really have any meaning, only that there was no
input on the XEP for over a year.
Paul
26.02.2020 16:41:06 Ivan Vučica :
> Hi,
>
> Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support
Hi,
Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support querying for an
archive similar to how it's done with XEP-0313.
tl;dr Can querying archives on non-own, non-MUC, non-pubsub JID for
1:1 chats be standardized? Can it be standardized that server
implementations don't have to support
