[Standards] OBSOLETED: XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM)

Version 1.5.3 of XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM) has been released. Abstract: This specification defines an XHTML 1.0 Integration Set for use in exchanging instant messages that contain lightweight text markup. The protocol enables an XMPP entity to format a message using a small range of commonly-used HTML

[Standards] DEPRECATED: XEP-0137 (Publishing Stream Initiation Requests)

Version 1.1 of XEP-0137 (Publishing Stream Initiation Requests) has been released. Abstract: This specification defines an XMPP protocol extension that enables an XMPP entity to advertise the fact that it is willing accept a particular Stream Initiation request. The protocol is used mainly to

Re: [Standards] [XEP-0234] Jingle File Transfer, Last Call and File Sharing

Am Dienstag, den 27.02.2018, 15:37 -0700 schrieb Peter Saint-Andre: > On 2/27/18 10:33 AM, Ruslan N. Marchenko wrote: > > That actually touches a point which is nagging me each time I'm > > looking > > into implementation. Who is responsible for closing the session? > > > > According to this [1]

Re: [Standards] undefined state in XEP-0050

On 22.02.2018 10:28, Kevin Smith wrote: >> On 21 Feb 2018, at 18:50, Florian Schmaus wrote: >> On 06.08.2015 17:42, Goffi wrote: >>> My guess is that "execute" should be equivalent to "complete" when >>> "next" is not possible (but what if "complete" is disabled too ?). >> >> I

[Standards] What is the size limit of node and item ids in XEP-0060: Publish-Subscribe?

Hi, I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim. I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items ids in Pubsub (like we have for the JIDs). Also do we have some specific forbid characters, basically what is the format of such attributes?

Re: [Standards] What is the size limit of node and item ids in XEP-0060: Publish-Subscribe?

On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote: > Hi, > > I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim. > > I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items > ids in Pubsub (like we have for the JIDs). > Also do we have some specific forbid

Re: [Standards] What is the size limit of node and item ids in XEP-0060: Publish-Subscribe?

On 01.03.2018 01:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 2/28/18 3:18 PM, Timothée Jaussoin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I came across a database limitation while implementing Pubsub in Movim. >> >> I'd like to know if we have a limitation for the size of the node and items >> ids in Pubsub (like we have for

Re: [Standards] Message-IDs

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 08:59:01AM +, Kevin Smith wrote: > On 13 Feb 2018, at 16:57, Simon Friedberger wrote: > > E3. Simply make the ID: FROM-TIMESTAMP. > > Here FROM needs to be the eventual FROM after possible > > rewriting. Can > > that be

[Standards] XMPP Council Agenda 2014-02-28

Folks, The XMPP Council will be holding it's regular meeting today (Wednesday) at 1600 UTC. We organise the agenda on Trello at https://trello.com/b/ww7zWMlI/xmpp-council-agenda and I (try to) send out the final agenda about 24 hours in advance. Agenda as follows: 1) Role Call 2) For fork's

Re: [Standards] XMPP Council Agenda 2014-02-28

Wed, 28 Feb 2018 15:05:32 + Dave Cridland wrote: > 2014-02-28 Time machine? ___ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org

Re: [Standards] Message-IDs

On 28 Feb 2018, at 14:47, Denver Gingerich wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 08:59:01AM +, Kevin Smith wrote: >> On 13 Feb 2018, at 16:57, Simon Friedberger wrote: >>>E3. Simply make the ID: FROM-TIMESTAMP. >>>Here FROM needs to be

Re: [Standards] Message-IDs

On 13 Feb 2018, at 16:57, Simon Friedberger wrote: > During the discussion on the different ID types at the summit I had an > idea for > a possible solution to the problem but not a sufficient understanding of the > problem to even discuss it. I tried to find somebody to

Re: [Standards] Message-IDs

On Mittwoch, 28. Februar 2018 10:28:01 CET Kevin Smith wrote: > On 26 Feb 2018, at 15:59, Simon Friedberger wrote: > > So, lest this discussion just die. Here is a proposal: > Thanks for the proposal. Bashing follows. > > >Client-A generates message-ID based on

Re: [Standards] Dusty Drafts

Thanks Tedd. I suggest Dave shoves all of these on a future Council agenda for discussion. /K > On 27 Feb 2018, at 12:40, Tedd Sterr wrote: > > For reference, XEPs that list the given XEP as a dependency (to what extent > they actually make use of it is another

Re: [Standards] Dusty Drafts

On 27 Feb 2018, at 16:21, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > On 2/27/18 5:40 AM, Tedd Sterr wrote: >> For reference, XEPs that list the given XEP as a dependency (to what >> extent they actually make use of it is another matter): > > Thanks. Further comments inline. > >>

Re: [Standards] Message-IDs

On 26 Feb 2018, at 15:59, Simon Friedberger wrote: > So, lest this discussion just die. Here is a proposal: Thanks for the proposal. Bashing follows. >Client-A generates message-ID based on HASH(connection_counter, >server_salt). The connection_counter needs to

[Standards] 2018-02-28 Council Meeting Minutes

# 2018-02-28 Council Meeting Minutes Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2018-02-28/#16:00:13 ## Role Call - Dave Cridland (chairing) - Daniel Gultsch - Georg Lukas - Kevin Smith - Sam Whited ## For fork's sake, can somebody else take the minutes? Georg this time ## Good Idea Extraction The

Re: [Standards] XMPP Council Agenda 2014-02-28

On 28 February 2018 at 15:20, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote: > Wed, 28 Feb 2018 15:05:32 + > Dave Cridland wrote: > >> 2014-02-28 > > Time machine? Apparently. No idea why I got that wrong. ___ Standards mailing

Re: [Standards] Council Minutes 2018-02-14

On 14 Feb 2018, at 16:55, Dave Cridland wrote: > 3) Deprecate XEP-0071 XHTML-IM - > http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2018-02-14/#16:03:14 > > https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0071.html > > Dave noted this was the very specific case of embedding an XHTML > subset into IM messages,

Re: [Standards] XEP-0280: Should carbons of carbons be produced?

On 22 Feb 2018, at 14:09, Владимир wrote: > You mean ? The server > treats this as sending a message and simply routes it back to transport for > delivery (+ produces no carbons). I finally understand the problem, sorry for being slow. I’d have thought this was the issue - the

Re: [Standards] NEW: XEP-0401 (Easy User Onboarding)

On 21 Feb 2018, at 18:42, Georg Lukas wrote: > > * Jonas Wielicki [2018-01-25 15:57]: >>> However, then we need to define how the client can determine whether >>> this Data Form is a PREAUTH compatible form, and whether the user is >>> still required to add