XMPP Council - 2011-06-15

Yep.

Got a minute yet, though.

2s

I already have us 1 minute past time

Now we're on time.

1) Roll call.

I'm here.

Ralph sends apologies.

presente

Nathan appears absent.

I'm here

Yay.

2) Agenda bashing.

None

nay

I might have an AOB at the end

k

4) Approve version 1.1rc1 of "XEP-0171: Language Translation"? http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0171-1.1.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0171/diff/1.0/vs/1.1rc1

+1

I'm OK with this only because Peter's checked with the authors and we believe them to be the only implementors.

But I am OK with it.

+1 also

5) Approve version 1.3rc2 of "XEP-0198: Stream Management"? http://xmpp.org/extensions/tmp/xep-0198-1.3.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/diff/api/xep/0198/diff/1.2/vs/1.3rc2

+1

+1 also.

The only comment I have is that the new paragraph in section 5 threw me for a second

Oh, I seem to have missed 3)

But I guess it's technically right

Let's do that next :)

will vote on the list…need to read it again

k

3) Last call on XEP-0266 (Jingle Voice codecs)?

It's changed already?

MattJ: there was a comment on the list about that point in 198

the current vesion says "XEP-0266: Codecs for Jingle Audio"

right, audio is more than voice

(-:

I think it captures consensus from the jingle@ list

Pedantic Wednesday

linuxwolf: ;-)

I'm +1 on lastcalling, anyway.

Ditto

+1, although there's already some dissent on the standards@ list

some, or only Arc? ;-)

well, ok…one (-:

Heh

Last call is a chance for such feedback to be heard.

6) Discuss 0220 (Dialback).

rough consensus -- as they say in the IETF, he might be in the rough

That's what LC is for

true, hence my +1 d-:

What are the open issues with 220?

features

right

Do we have agreement between the authors on this yet?

we need to settle on the features stuff

haha

I was just poking the Council in case they have opinions in the matter

You know me, I rarely have opinions :D

:P

None that I haven't given on-list as an implementor :)

I've already stated mine previously

ok I will follow up on the list, then

Thanks

7) Discuss 0299 (Video codecs).

right

Mostly just are we happy that this was an editorial change splitting it in two and don't need Council to approve it.

Which I am.

so I pubilshed that on Sunday without Council approval

right

mitosis

or somesuch

it's ok with me

+1

Goodo.

8) Date of next meeting

Same bat time, same bat channel?

WFM

AOB?

Hey hey.

Remember who's in charge here!

9) AOB.

I'm wondering if any council members have ideas about how to handle hash agility -- http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-June/024599.html

:P

I thought next meeting was always the last item on the agenda, my bad

waqas's approach seems sensible

seems about right to me

MattJ: I'm wondering if we want to define different elements in special namespaces like urn:xmpp:hashes:sha1 -- that way <sha1 xmlns='urn:xmpp:hashes:sha1'>...</sha1> could be included in any XMPP element

I'm happy with leaving SI to wither and fixing this in Jingle, and namespacing the elements seems fine to me.

stpeter, mmm, that's nice

agree with the namespacing

so we might have a separate document that defies "hash functions for XMPP"

and it would be revised when we change our recommendations

etc.

a "living document" if you will

seem reasonable?

s/defies/defines/ :)

With no time to digest the idea, it doesn't seem unreasonable.

It would certainly help the current state of ad-hoc hashes included in each XEP

MattJ: right

I will look at the different XEPs and perhaps get a protoXEP ready for next week

ok

that's all from me, I think

Anyone else?

plus if I get it ready quickly, it could be XEP-0300 :)

Nay

:)

Right, so I think we're done.

yep

Thanks all.

thank you!

adios

Merci

Kev, it seems that Nathan and Ralph are DNV on 262

er

perhaps only Ralph

ererer

only Nathan

sigh

too much multitasking

calendar updated to reflect next week's meeting

Thanks :)

sigh

I've been screwing things up lately

Time for a holiday, then.

yeah right

case in point: XEP-0171

etc.

I'll wait longer on 198 :P

stpeter, what did you screw up with 171?

The # thing?

If so, wasn't it really council's job to spot that too? :)

no, I pushed out 1.1 without waiting for votes from the Council members who weren't able to attend the meeting :(

dumb

Oh, I see

:|