moparisthebestfriendly poke for any available editor to issue XEP-0368 call for experience :)
jonaswmoparisthebest, I’m still not sure on how the process works, sorry.
jonaswmoparisthebest, but I’ll give it a shot now anyways
moparisthebestjonasw, I don't think anyone is, how about just an email like "Subject: Call for Experience: XEP-0368" "The council is going to consider moving this to final and is looking for feedback" or something
moparisthebestI'm bad with words :)
jonaswI can’t simply say council is going to do anything unless council said so
moparisthebestthat's what xep-0001 says though
jonaswXEP-0001 says that the editor (without specifying what triggers this) issues a CFE *before* the XEP is laid before council for advancement.
jonaswthere’s nothing in XEP-0001 (I thnik, point me to it if I’m wrong) which says that council MUST look at something which has been CFE’d
moparisthebestright, that's what I'm looking to get to happen
jonaswI’m still trying to figure out what stops me from issuing CFEs for all (old enough) Draft XEPs at once
moparisthebestoh yea, but it'll be presented to them at least 14 days after anyway
jonaswit seems fishy :)
jonaswanyways, let’s give this a shot
moparisthebestyea jonasw I'm just trying to push it towards final I only know what xep-1 says and it seems like next step is for editor to send email so :shrug: :)
jonaswsomebody will complain if we did anything wrong
moparisthebestthat's kind of what I figured, if it's wrong, xep-1 should be clarified
jonaswyou’re the author, right?
jonaswthere you go, email sent (will take a minute or two to propagate through the list)
jonaswwill also comment on it once the mail got through, I actually implemented it.
moparisthebestoh yea in your client, library, or both?
jonasw(from which follows, client)
jonasw(I didn’t bother with implementing an off switch)
moparisthebestyea I was going to try to pull up all implementations I know about in a mail later
moparisthebestdwd said he implemented it in a server, it's the only s2s implementation I know of, there are a few client ones iirc
moparisthebestit's arguably much more useful for clients
jonaswthere you go
Guus368 appendix A - Short Name: NOT_YET_ASSIGNED ... If this is going from draft to final, it's likely never getting one?
Guus(perhaps simply remove that line?)
Guusalso, section 4 starts with a undefined referal: "this provides". It being the start of a paragraph titled "Use Cases", makes it unclear if 'this' refers to the entire XEP, or rather the ALPN description in the previous paragraph. I'd reword it slightly.
SamWhitedI think the council assigns a short name when it goes to draft or final.
Guusin unrelated news: I'm going to have a beautiful bike shed. Been working on its plans for years.
Guusxep-0053 suggests short names can be assigned as early as when a xep is published as experimental: "When a XEP is first published in the Experimental state, the XMPP Registrar shall work with the author(s) to mint an appropriate namespace name, which shall be of the form "urn:xmpp:ShortName:0" or, where appropriate, "urn:xmpp:ShortName:SubName:0"
GuusI don't care to much, by the way. I just thought the 'yet' part was misplaced in something that's about to be 'final'