XMPP Council - 2012-11-21

  1. Tobias has left
  2. bear has left
  3. bear has joined
  4. Tobias has joined
  5. Tobias has joined
  6. Tobias has joined
  7. Tobias has left
  8. Tobias has joined
  9. Kev T-2 hours.
  10. Tobias has left
  11. Zash has joined
  12. Tobias has joined
  13. Zash has joined
  14. m&m has joined
  15. m&m am I early or late?
  16. Kev Early.
  17. Kev 32 minutes.
  18. m&m yay
  19. m&m holiday + timezone differences == confusion
  20. Kev Honoured you're taking time out of the holiday to chat to us... :)
  21. m&m well, I suppose we should have a first meeting at some point before 2013 (-:
  22. Kev It does seem desirable.
  23. MattJ has joined
  24. Kev I've poked Ralph, but he's got another minute anyway :)
  25. Kev Ah, and at that moment his client auto-idles :)
  26. Kev I did check with him last night that he'd be here, so shall we give him a few minutes?
  27. m&m sure
  28. Kev I'm fairly keen that for electing a chair everyone's here, even if for no other votes of the year :)
  29. m&m exacetally
  30. Tobias here
  31. Kev Excellent. Just Ralph, then.
  32. Kev drums his fingers on the desk.
  33. m&m hrm
  34. MattJ I'm in no hurry, FWIW :)
  35. Tobias so for this kev had to wake me up ^^
  36. Kev MattJ: m&m's on holiday, it'd be nice to not keep him indefinitely :)
  37. m&m heh
  38. MattJ I didn't say m&m wasn't in a hurry
  39. Kev Obviously the rest of you I don't care about :D
  40. m&m haha
  41. Kev Board had to vote on a Chair yesterday with just 3/5 present.
  42. Kev So we'll beat that with 4/5 even if Ralph doesn't appear :)
  43. Kev I'd suggest if we wait until 15past and then go ahead regardless it'd seem fair - what do others think?
  44. m&m at least it's quorum
  45. m&m that works for me
  46. m&m I'm not in a hurry
  47. MattJ \o/
  48. MattJ I'm +1 to :15
  49. MattJ Ok, for want of something to discuss, and while we're all here...
  50. MattJ *mostly all here
  51. Kev I'm mostly all there.
  52. MattJ http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/xep-json.html
  53. Kanchil MattJ: http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/xep-json.html: XEP-xxxx: JSON container
  54. MattJ Shush Kanchil
  55. m&m |-:
  56. MattJ Heh
  57. Kev It's quarter past.
  58. m&m let's just do this
  59. Kev I guess we should go ahead, if we want to be sure of finishing on time.
  60. Kev 1) Roll call.
  61. Kev I'm here.
  62. m&m presente
  63. MattJ Also
  64. Kev Tobias was here 7 minutes ago. I hope he's still here now :)
  65. Kev I guess we'll find out if he's not when we do (2) :)
  66. Kev 2) Electing chair.
  67. Tobias yup
  68. Tobias presente
  69. Kev I'm happy to do it. Would anyone else like to be considered?
  70. MattJ *tumbleweed*
  71. m&m I'm fine playing backup (-:
  72. Zash whispers "Elect Ralph in his absence"
  73. Tobias yeah..let's all vote on backup :P
  74. MattJ Heh
  75. m&m (-:
  76. Kev Heh.
  77. Kev Should I take that as "no-one else standing", then?
  78. m&m yesh
  79. Kev In which case: Vote for Kev to be chair...
  80. MattJ +1
  81. m&m +1 to Kev
  82. Tobias +1
  83. Kev +1
  84. MattJ Shocking
  85. Kev Marvellous.
  86. Kev Without even resorting to threats of physical violence.
  87. Tobias *ouch*
  88. Kev 3) Message Forwarding. Last Call?
  89. MattJ +1
  90. m&m +1
  91. Kev That's "Stanza Forwarding', actually, isn't it?
  92. MattJ It is
  93. Kev 297, in any case.
  94. m&m yes
  95. Kev I'm +1 on an LC.
  96. Tobias can you also forward IQs?
  97. Kev Tobias: If you want to.
  98. MattJ Yes
  99. Tobias then +1
  100. MattJ I won't pretend that's useful though
  101. m&m there's limited applicability for IQs
  102. Kev I can only come up with contrived examples, at first glance.
  103. m&m such as end-to-end encryptkon
  104. m&m encryption
  105. m&m which I need to add to the draft
  106. Kev I'm +1 too.
  107. Kev 4) Date of next meeting
  108. MattJ I'm starting to feel obligated to anticipate all the horrible ways people might use XEPs I write and include "Please don't do this" requests
  109. Kev Next Wednesday, 1600UTC?
  110. m&m Kev: +1
  111. MattJ wfm
  112. Tobias wfm
  113. m&m MattJ: the only solution is to not write XEPs (-:
  114. Kev Marvellous. Board have timed their meetings to be weekly, immediately subsequent to Council this year, which is convenient if anyone wants to drop in and heckle.
  115. MattJ Easier said than done
  116. Kev Oh, no, it's quite easy.
  117. MattJ Kev, yes, that's a great idea
  118. Kev You just join the MUC and make irrelevant comments.
  119. MattJ They're still in xsf@?
  120. Kev ...oh, you didn't mean that :D
  121. Kev Yes.
  122. m&m (-:
  123. Kev 5) Any other business
  124. Kev I'll do my now traditional "Anything anyone wants to change about the way Council is chaired/run this year?" question.
  125. m&m *crickets*
  126. Zash
  127. MattJ It's been pretty ok with me, except when meeting times change, or when I think they have, but they haven't really
  128. Kev I've now, I hope, passed the ludicrously busy spell I had the last couple of months. I've not had to go on site for multiple weeks in a row \o/.
  129. m&m heh
  130. Kev OK.
  131. Kev Any other any other business?
  132. MattJ Not here
  133. m&m nay
  134. Tobias nope
  135. m&m ignores that jay-son thingie
  136. Kev Marvellous. Despite a delayed start, 4 minutes to spare.
  137. Kev bangs the gavel.
  138. MattJ Any informal comments on the jay-son thingie? I fully intend to submit it otherwise :)
  139. Kev Thanks all :)
  140. MattJ Thanks Kev
  141. Kev MattJ: I think it's a bit nasty, and likely to cause pain, but it's something there's a (perceived) requirement for, so who am I to judge?
  142. MattJ What pain might it cause? and what (if anything) can be done to prevent it?
  143. m&m MattJ: to be frank, I almost no benefit to it … you still need context
  144. MattJ I can't be the only person who thinks JSON in <body/> is evil
  145. m&m I think that's evil also, but I also don't see a point to a single wrapper for all cases of JSON
  146. m&m guidelines for how one mixes in JSON to XMPP, sure
  147. m&m a single container … no
  148. Kev MattJ: I don't think that specification for including JSON causes pain, particularly. More that mixing content types like that doesn't seem to buy very much, and JSON isn't all that great for things that need interop and extensibility etc., and ...
  149. Kev m&m: This is true, but at least for the way Swift does parsing/serialising, having all json always in the same wrapper element (which is then within a context element) would be convenient.
  150. Kev *Swiften
  151. Kev So I'm not particularly opposed to saying "If your protocol is shipping JSON, shove it inside <this> element, within your own namespaced element.
  152. Kev As example 2 does in MattJ's spec.
  153. MattJ Right
  154. Zash Compare to 297 and xhtml-im
  155. MattJ That's pretty much exactly what it's intended for
  156. m&m frankly, I'd only be ok if it always had to be wrapped by something else
  157. Kev MattJ: So I think maybe example 1 should go.
  158. Kev ^5s m&m
  159. MattJ I'm ok with that
  160. m&m in fact, I'm not sure 297 should be present without somehting wrapping it
  161. m&m something even
  162. Kev m&m: 297 does have a use case for this, which is that sometimes you really do just want to forward a message as a real forward.
  163. MattJ But many closed "XMPP as middleware" do already do the JSON-in-body hack, I've seen it in multiple places now, and I wince every time
  164. MattJ The "context" there is the sender and recipient
  165. m&m MattJ: I'm not saying it won't happen
  166. MattJ I agree that's not pretty, but it's reality
  167. Kev MattJ: Where interop isn't required, I don't really much care what people do :)
  168. MattJ I do, or they might as well not be using XMPP :)
  169. Kev You can encode stuff in a message body for all I care as long as it doesn't reach anyone else's system :)
  170. MattJ and I see this as a step up from what they do now
  171. MattJ I've had to interface with such systems :(
  172. Kev As soon as you need to interface with them, interop's required.
  173. Kev And it starts being clearly wrong :)
  174. MattJ So, happy with a "SHOULD" be inside another element?
  175. MattJ I think that sounds good to me
  176. m&m I'm happy with a MUST
  177. MattJ Heh
  178. Kev TBH, I don't see much of an argument to not say MUST, although hills, etc.
  179. Kev In as much as anyone who's going to ignore it is going to ignore the XEP completely.
  180. MattJ Right
  181. m&m plants flag, burns bridge that lets me down
  182. MattJ But they can be coaxed in the right direction
  183. Kev They're not going to say "Oh, well, I'm happy to put it in this wrapper element, but my own namespace? That's just a bridge too far, melad"
  184. MattJ That's mostly the intention
  185. Kev They'll either swallow it and do the right thing, or ignore everything the spec says completely :)
  186. Kev So you may as well say MUST do the right thing.
  187. MattJ !xep 297
  188. Kanchil MattJ: XEP-0297(forwarding): http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0297.html Stanza Forwarding - Standards Track/Experimental - Updated: 2012-07-05
  189. Kev Ah, are we talking about 297 or JSON now?
  190. Kev I was talking about JSON.
  191. MattJ JSON
  192. m&m I thought we were talking about JSON
  193. MattJ I'm just cross-referencing language :)
  194. Kev OK.
  195. Zash !xep 231
  196. Kanchil Zash: XEP-0231(bob): http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0231.html Bits of Binary - Standards Track/Draft - Updated: 2008-09-03
  197. m&m has left
  198. Tobias has left
  199. Tobias has joined
  200. Tobias has left
  201. Tobias has joined