cool, so if I just make something up myself, I can be sure it won't be a big change once you standardise something.
Thanks for answering On Nov 12, 1:00 am, tirsen <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah good find. In our implementation we essentially have a special > way of querying a groups own index (that's what invoked via the > "with:public" or "group:group" syntax). > > We have not yet worked out how to standardize this for federation. > > On Nov 11, 9:53 pm, Mathijs <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > I'm in the process of implementing most of the whitepaper about access > > control. > > The whitepaper mentions the INDEX permission address A can have over > > address B. > > > I would like to know what's supposed to happen with B's history. > > Will A also receive all wavelets that have ever been sent to B? > > Or will the indexing "start" from the moment the edge gets defined? > > > Since the index wave is generated on the fly (not stored on disk), I > > can choose to take INDEX edges into account when generating the index > > wave (optionally taking into account the date/time the edge was > > created). > > > This will work for local wavelets, but I would like to know what would > > happen on federation. > > I know the protocol is still draft and these are still whitepapers, so > > I understand things might change. > > I just want to make sure I take a somewhat "safe" path, which is > > conceptually mostly the same as planned. > > > So what would happen if a...@local gets INDEX, READ, ADD_ME on b.remote. > > The access edge(on which remote is authorative) will get federated to > > local. > > All wavelets on which b participates will be federated to local when > > they get updated, so local can generate A's index wave with all b- > > addressed waves in it. > > What if a wants to see all of b's history as well (if I join a group, > > I would like to browse the archive)? > > a is permitted to read all waves on which b participates. > > The only thing is: how does a know about all waves b is on? > > > Should I write a custom protocolextension for this > > (like opening a remote index wave) ? > > Or is there a better solution? > > > Any thoughts on this would be very welcome. > > Mathijs --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
