On 8 February 2017 at 22:11, Tobias M <[email protected]> wrote: > * providing guidelines to what terms to use for certain things the protocol > introduces, e.g. XEP-0319 could recommend “Idle since” or “last active at” > as possible phrases to use when presenting the time to the user > * defining that for MIX channels, the primary name of a channel in the UI > should be the roster item name of the bookmark, as it is user editable, and > provide recommendations what value to use as default > * providing recommendations how to handle end-to-end crypto (i.e. OMEMO) use > cases, like key verification, trust management, or visual assurance for the > user that the current chat is encrypted
I'm generally in favour of this. There is an argument that such recommendations might be included within the body of the text, but I think if pulled out, or at least summarized within a section, then developers who (sensibly) have used an existing library will be able to easily read the section for useful advice, without being bogged down with the minutiae of implementation. I would argue, though, that any use of RFC 2119 language in such a section would be a bad idea. Trying to tie "conformance" into usability considerations would leave us with some very odd cases. Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
