I think we came up with the common understanding that to reference a
previous message in a conversation, we use
- the origin-id or message id in direct chats
- the MUC service's stanza-id in MUCs + some kind of method (e.g.
presence tracking, occupant-id) to have certainty that the sender is
the
On 20/02/2023 11.05, JC Brand wrote:
On 20.02.23 10:32, Florian Schmaus wrote:
On 13/02/2023 16.57, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
I’m currently looking at implementing 'Message Retraction' and I think
it should get rid of Fastening.
I mentioned it during Summit and while it wasn’t discussed much
On 20.02.23 10:32, Florian Schmaus wrote:
On 13/02/2023 16.57, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
I’m currently looking at implementing 'Message Retraction' and I think
it should get rid of Fastening.
I mentioned it during Summit and while it wasn’t discussed much
further my comment also didn’t get much
On 13/02/2023 16.57, Daniel Gultsch wrote:
I’m currently looking at implementing 'Message Retraction' and I think
it should get rid of Fastening.
I mentioned it during Summit and while it wasn’t discussed much
further my comment also didn’t get much protest: I think Fastening is
dead.
A
Hi Daniel
Thanks for bringing this up again. This was also the feedback when the
XEP was reviewed by council about 2 (!) years ago.
As one of the XEP authors, I've gone ahead and made a PR with the change.
https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1270
The next XEP, 0425 'Message Moderation' is
Hi Daniel,
If fastening is dead indeed, but retraction is not, I think it's
reasonable to remove references to fastening in retraction.
Looks good to me.
-- Nicolas
___
Standards mailing list
Info:
Hi,
I’m currently looking at implementing 'Message Retraction' and I think
it should get rid of Fastening.
I mentioned it during Summit and while it wasn’t discussed much
further my comment also didn’t get much protest: I think Fastening is
dead.
A general purpose approach doesn’t seem to work
