XSF Discussion - 2018-08-14

would it be possible to reference MUCs in other MUCs ?

I think that it could be a nice way to discover more content in the XMPP network and help the users to go to the correct chatroom

for example when you have several MUCs for the same project, one for the users, one internal, one for support

edhelas: the generic way is to use xmpp:?join URIs

Talk about Jabber software development in xmpp:jdev@conference.jabber.org?join

yes this I know, I was more talking about extending 0045 (or add a new XEP) to add some configuration that will be retrieved in the MUC infos for example

I was thinking this morning it would be good to provide web links as well

> I think that it could be a nice way to discover more content in the XMPP network and help the users to go to the correct chatroom Would be cool, you could end up with something like Discord does with their servers. 1000% supporter of that

What does Discord do with their servers?

edhelas, I remember some discussion at a previous Summit about MIX, which was about the distinction between room name, topic and description, where a list of links was also discussed.

I don’t remember what happened in MIX afterwards.

MattJ, sorry for late response. As a user, you can create a 'server' and in it, create serveral rooms. Everybody that joins your 'server', has access to those rooms. It is like setting up an XMPP server and having all rooms discovered there. I found this screenshot: https://support.discordapp.com/hc/en-us/article_attachments/208784188/Step_1_edited.png There you can see from left to right, al servers you are joined, the room list of the selected server, and the chat window of the selected room, at the top right, the users' list

You can find multiple rooms on every 'server'

Fake federation? :)

Heh :)

It actually is federation, after a fashion, just a closed one.

But they have the unhelpful assumption that you will only have a single Discord identity, which is leaked to everyone everywhere, along with which servers you're on.

But I think having something like that supported is really interesting. As edhelas said, you could group MUCs under the same umbrella. As a very easy example, You set up a server for your company and then every department ('server') has its own rooms and such.

Kev, I didn't know that, thank you (I'm not really a user, but I would say I like their product)

I have multiple Discord accounts because I'm not keen on that privacy leak, but that means it's incredibly inconvenient to use them.

Unlike Slack, where you have an identity per server.

The other end of the spectrum of annoyance

The only reason I find that annoying is when adding accounts on a new machine - but even then it's a mixed blessing.

Other than that I find the distinction between contexts rather helpful.

I came with that idea because I see a lot of chatrooms putting those links in their descriptions

so a little tag <link uri="xmpp:otherroom@conference.server.tld" description="Check our other room for specific user support"/> could help

but maybe we can do that more generic, like for all the JIDs

PEP over MUC JIDs ?

Disco

edhelas, that’s XEP-0316.

Link Mauve oh ! <3

Speaking of the blessings of federation.... https://infosec-handbook.eu/blog/federation-myths/

'And many of these XEPs are “experimental” or “drafts”, not standards!'

I remember some slight bike-shedding

> Speaking of the blessings of federation.... https://infosec-handbook.eu/blog/federation-myths/ Ahaha 👍👍👍 great stuff

> In our experience, some XMPP users go to great lengths to defend a network protocol which they did not invent or extend. We also experienced that some of them hate Matrix, another federated service which competes with XMPP. This makes it hard to follow their philosophy.

I wanted to like Matrix, but it makes it hard for me :(