While I can understand the use case, I also believe it’s low value compared to 
potentially negative consequences. I think at most this could change from MUST 
to SHOULD in order to encourage the full-jid restriction, and prevent the can 
of worms from opening too far, but allowing the use case for implementations 
that choose to allow the use case.


Thanks,
Xander Dumaine


On September 20, 2016 at 2:09:18 AM, Georg Lukas 
(ge...@op-co.de<mailto:ge...@op-co.de>) wrote:

* Tobias M <tmarkm...@googlemail.com> [2016-09-16 13:41]:
> What would speak for allowing edits across resources:

+1 for allowing this use case. I think it would improve the consistency
of the XMPP UX, and increase user confidence.

> Another case is where a server sends different carbons messages to different 
> resources. Some think allowing cross-resource corrections will open a can of 
> worms.

I think that LMC is already a huge can of worms, and should be treated
accordingly by clients. If your client B sees a different message from
what you sent from client A, and you LMC that message on B, you are
probably already aware of the differences.


Georg
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to