> On 06/16/2010 08:43 PM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote: > > The log, attached to the first message clearly says that even author of > > XEP-0184 do not agree with you, Kevin. So, why do you argue? > Maybe we should just choose what we want of this XEP and just re-phrase > some sentences. > I personaly think that knowing that message has not correctly been > received and processed (decrypted for example) is usefull so that we > know we should re-send it. Now knowing that it has been read is > something else. Yes! For me is interesting both the fact the message is delivered to the other side and the fact that user on the other side read it. That's why I suggest to extend XEP-0184 with <read /> element.
- [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/> vs. <displaye... Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/> vs. <... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/> vs.... Yann Leboulanger
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/>... Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/>... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <received/... Yann Leboulanger
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <rece... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <rece... Kozlov Konstantin
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <... Yann Leboulanger
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Kozlov Konstantin
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Yann Leboulanger
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: <... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Konstantin Kozlov
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Kevin Smith
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Konstantin Kozlov
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Yann Leboulanger
- Re: [Standards] XEP-0184: ... Peter Saint-Andre