On 2 Dec 2016, at 15:49, forenjunkie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Its not written down somewhere that its up to the client, but it makes no > sense to put a selflimiting hard rule on a archiving XEP like MAM and exclude > certain messages per XEP rule.
> > We have store hints, the most prominent servers respect these. And it would > make no sense to not respect it if a client explicitly wishes for a message > to be stored. Oh, it’d make lots of sense. Server admins can very reasonably want to choose how their archive is populated, rather than having remote clients do so. > So to make it more clear, if i want to save a message on a current prosody or > ejabbered MAM implemenation, i can do this as a client with a store hint. While that’s nice for you, Prosody and ejabberd are certainly not the whole world ;) > you dont have to querry the whole archive, you just querry until you get a > read marker, then you know everything that comes before that was already read > so i dont have to query it. This is untrue, though. If I have two contacts, it’s quite easy for me to have unread messages for contact A that are hundreds or thousands of messages older than my messages from contact B, all of which are read. If I merely read the archive backwards until I found a read marker, I wouldn’t find the unread messages for contact A. /K > > > Am 02.12.2016 um 16:34 schrieb Kevin Smith: >> On 2 Dec 2016, at 15:26, forenjunkie <[email protected]> wrote: >>> in a single chat conversation, it makes no sense to query unread messages. >> I’m not sure that’s true at all, but putting that to the side for the >> minute... >> >>> you could just query the last 10 MAM Messages, if no readmarker comes with >>> it, query another 10. such a implementation of MAM would be very weird to >>> me, but you could do it and get only unread messages with it. So this >>> already works without problem with the MAM and 0333 XEP. >>> And in single chat its not possible to "miss" a message in between, which >>> you would want to query. >> I think you’re missing the details of what I asked - how do you achieve this >> where there are a sufficient number of messages that just keeping querying >> until you have every message in your local archive isn’t viable? >> >>> And this is not a theory, XEP-0333 are stored by the server if the client >>> wishes that, and working implementations of MAM and 0333 together you can >>> witness for example in Conversations. >> It’s not up to the client whether 333 is stored by the server or not. >> >>> All i see in this proposal is adding complexity to the whole process in >>> introducing another thing the server has to support. >> Referring back to my previous question, can you provide an example of how to >> achieve this case with just 313 and 333 (in protocol)? >> >> /K >> _______________________________________________ >> Standards mailing list >> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards >> Unsubscribe: [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: [email protected] > _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
