> On 13 Jun 2016, at 11:41, Matthew Wild <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12 June 2016 at 12:39, Daniel Gultsch <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm bumping this thread since it hasn't yielded too many responses since I >> originally voiced my concerns. >> >> To briefly summarize the matter again. >> 1) XEP-0313 Section 5.1.2 describes a way for a server to inject the >> original / real jid into MUC messages. >> 2) This is a very useful addition to the spec in principal, however… >> 3) As a client I can't trust this information without a namespace bump. >> >> This means I would love to implement this in my client but I can't. >> >> So I would strongly suggest to bump the namespace on MAM ASAP. However >> bumping namespaces is not something we should do lightly and we should >> consider doing other changes as well like the stanza-ids that have been >> proposed over a year ago and are generally considered a good idea? > > I have a new version of XEP-0313 nearly ready to submit. One of the > open questions is whether to bump the namespace or not. I was > originally leaning towards not. However, if we do, there are some > extra small improvements we can make. I'll review your concerns (which > weren't already on my list of issues until now, so thanks for > re-raising them), and merge them into the new revision (which I'm > expecting to be the last before Draft). > > Meanwhile if anyone else has an opinion on this to share, now is the time.
What are the improvements if we bump? /K _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
