XMPP Council - 2013-08-14

  1. Lance has left
  2. m&m has joined
  3. Neustradamus has left
  4. Lance has joined
  5. Lance has left
  6. Lance has joined
  7. m&m has left
  8. m&m has joined
  9. m&m has left
  10. Lance has left
  11. Lance has joined
  12. m&m has joined
  13. m&m has left
  14. m&m has joined
  15. m&m has left
  16. m&m has joined
  17. Tobias has left
  18. Tobias has left
  19. Lance has left
  20. m&m has left
  21. Tobias has joined
  22. Lance has joined
  23. jabberjocke has joined
  24. Tobias has joined
  25. jabberjocke has left
  26. Lance has joined
  27. Tobias has joined
  28. jabberjocke has joined
  29. jabberjocke has left
  30. Tobias has joined
  31. m&m has joined
  32. Zash has joined
  33. Kev Same as last week's unmeeting, the only thing I see in the agenda for today is http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dynamic-forms.html
  34. Tobias ok
  35. Zash Will m&m be around for that IETF summary?
  36. m&m I will try
  37. Zash :D
  38. m&m I started the day quadruple-booked for meetings … now I'm down to double-booked (-:
  39. Tobias heh
  40. m&m if I'm not here … I am −1 on dynamic forms, unless the author can explain why ad-hoc commands is not suitable
  41. Tobias has left
  42. Tobias has joined
  43. Kev Meeting in 9 minutes.
  44. ralphm has joined
  45. Kev m&m: Do you believe that dynamic-forms can be done using -50 then, without all the extra business logic that's the core bit of the proposal?
  46. m&m yes
  47. MattJ has joined
  48. stpeter has joined
  49. Kev I don't see it.
  50. Kev I mean, I can see how you could build the same stuff on top of 50 that this builds on top of 4, but it still seems to be building stuff on top of XX.
  51. ralphm Present
  52. Kev ralphm: You've got 6mins yet :)
  53. Kev m&m: I don't see how -50 gives you ways of the client telling the server "I've got a value in this field now, but the form's not complete yet" or of the server replying with "Oh, OK, add these fields to the form, then".
  54. m&m -50 supports multiple stages, which could fulfill the same role
  55. Peter Waher has joined
  56. Kev Yes and no.
  57. Kev Because if you want the -50 stages to support that, you then lose the ability for -50 stages to support multiple stages.
  58. Peter Waher hello
  59. m&m that makes no sense
  60. Kev Peter Waher: Howdy.
  61. Kev m&m: It makes lots of sense :)
  62. m&m why can't the next stage send the form up to the point it knows of?
  63. m&m I've done this in the past
  64. m&m and now I'm in my next meeting
  65. Kev m&m: If you use multi-stage to be used for incomplete data submission, like the proposal needs, you can't also use multi-stage for multi-stage forms in their traditional sense.
  66. m&m don't know if I'll be paying enough attention here … sorry
  67. stpeter is indeed on a conference call and won't have much attention for the Council meeting
  68. ralphm stpeter: booh
  69. Kev Because you lose the ability to say "This is the next stage and I really mean it this time, please give me the next stage not the updated version of this stage".
  70. Kev And ding, it's time.
  71. Kev So 1) Roll call.
  72. Tobias here
  73. m&m not really heere
  74. Kev m&m is absent with apologies in a strange manner.
  75. m&m double-booked meetings
  76. m&m I can't help it today
  77. m&m nor next week
  78. ralphm here
  79. Tobias maybe we should find a different time then, at the end of this meeting?
  80. Kev MattJ: Poke.
  81. Kev I'm amenable to other times.
  82. Kev Or other days, at least. The time slot is probably as good as we'll get.
  83. Kev MattJ only just joined, he can't be not here can he?
  84. stpeter ralphm: it seems that the UPnP folks might be interested in using XMPP to cloud-enable their technology, so I'm helping them through some of the issues they're facing
  85. Kev I guess he's not.
  86. Kev 2) http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/dynamic-forms.html Accept as Experimental.
  87. ralphm stpeter: nice
  88. Kev m&m is -1, to post to list.
  89. Kev So I guess that makes everyone else irrelevant :)
  90. Peter Waher not necessarily
  91. Peter Waher since it might be relatively easy to respond to m&m's objections
  92. Kev Peter Waher: A single -1 is blocking, so it doesn't matter what the rest of us think.
  93. Peter Waher it would be good to hear what all think
  94. MattJ Present
  95. Tobias i'm +0, post-back is some strange term (don't know a better one off hand) and if xep-0050 is not suitable it could at least mentioned in the introduction why not, since data-forms and ad-hoc are deployed and used
  96. MattJ Sorry, clock I was watching seems to be a few mins out
  97. ralphm for what it is worth, I am not really convinced that the dynamic stuff needs additional protocol wrappers
  98. Kev I don't see how this stuff can be done with what we have without a spec of some sort or another (be it significant business logic on top of existing protocol, or new protocol). So I'm not objecting.
  99. MattJ I'm +0, since I haven't read the document yet, I'll read it and post my concerns to the thread if I have any
  100. Kev ralphm: So you're blocking it too, or not?
  101. ralphm That said, I am not objecting to publishing.
  102. Peter Waher the ad-hoc command was considered in the beginning, but was too different for the purpose. If m&m objects on list I can respond to why
  103. Peter Waher considered writing something about it in the xep
  104. Peter Waher but didn't
  105. Peter Waher can easilly add why it was not used
  106. Kev OK.
  107. Kev So, 3) Date of next meeting.
  108. Lance has joined
  109. Kev Given m&m's the person with the conflicts, and he's not here, I don't see much point changing the date. Let's go for next week at 15:10UTC as usual, and we can change during the week if we want.
  110. ralphm Peter Waher: design choices are always great to have inside specs like this
  111. ralphm +1
  112. Tobias Kev, fine with me
  113. Peter Waher yes, I see that now. Thought about it, but for some reason I didn't add it. I'll correct that in my response to m&m on list
  114. Kev OK. 4) AOB?
  115. Tobias none here
  116. MattJ None here
  117. Kev Good enough.
  118. Kev Thanks all.
  119. Kev bangs the gavel.
  120. MattJ Thanks Kev
  121. Tobias thanks
  122. ralphm Thanks!
  123. Tobias ralphm, you planned some changes to XEP's HTML rendering?
  124. ralphm oh, right
  125. Tobias in what direction?
  126. ralphm basically some additional CSS
  127. Peter Waher there are problems with rendering of images
  128. Tobias Peter Waher, got an example?
  129. Peter Waher img tags are rendered with width="" height=""
  130. Peter Waher since width and height attributes are forbidden according to the schema
  131. Peter Waher this works in FireFox
  132. Peter Waher but makes images invisible in IE
  133. Peter Waher (it's treated as width="0" height="0")
  134. Tobias Peter Waher, ah..right
  135. Tobias wonder if we can do something about that :)
  136. Peter Waher if you want, I can mail you a mail I sent to Peter Saint-André earlier
  137. Tobias also needs to check how that looks in the pdf rendering :)
  138. ralphm you probably need to look at extensions/xep.xsl, where the attribute is rendered
  139. Peter Waher yes, I've proposed a correction
  140. Tobias great
  141. Peter Waher to whom do I mail it?
  142. Tobias can mail it to me
  143. bear if you cc me then I can look into fixing it
  144. Tobias tm@ayena.de
  145. Peter Waher bear: What's your mail address?
  146. bear bear@bear.im
  147. Peter Waher mail forwarded
  148. Tobias thx
  149. bear got it
  150. Peter Waher (y)
  151. Zash delivery receipts over xmpp! :D
  152. Peter Waher has left
  153. bear tobias - I pushed the static site to the XSF github repo
  154. bear I am using the github repo just as a working area, the final repo will be our normal one
  155. bear i'll be adding more to the README to document what each area is
  156. bear realizes he is spamming the wrong folks and will send email
  157. stpeter promises to read the meeting log once he's finished with this conferene call...
  158. Tobias bear, we want to mix standards and our website repo?
  159. bear mix?
  160. Tobias well..do both stuff in a single repo
  161. bear that probably needs to be talked about - a lot of it has just been a few of us just doing things
  162. bear my reasoning for using github right now is just pure convienence, i'm in it every day
  163. Tobias heh
  164. bear and this test site needs some serious css love
  165. Tobias MattJ, got a link to that repo?
  166. ralphm Tobias: I see the gen.py depends on mercurial for versioning information?
  167. MattJ Which?
  168. Tobias ralphm, yes
  169. ralphm so you can't even build the XEPs from the git checkout
  170. Tobias you can using XSLT
  171. ralphm right
  172. Tobias gen.py renders the last version of a XEP that doesn't have an <interim/> tag in it
  173. ralphm or all
  174. bear part of why I spoke up to help - this needs to be "solved" for the static site generation
  175. bear notes email sent
  176. ralphm for some reason the XEP generated from the repo have a smaller font size than on the web site
  177. Tobias ralphm, basically i went with hg in python because of the easy py api, i think back then there wasn't a good one for git
  178. Tobias i can try changing it to dulwich, but that's at the end of my todo :)
  179. ralphm I have a personal preference to hg, too
  180. ralphm but our generation process should depend on it
  181. Tobias should?
  182. ralphm not. I pull and push from github using mercurial with ease
  183. Kev Let's not go changing our repo format :)
  184. Tobias Kev, hahaha
  185. Tobias Kev, ever used dulwich?
  186. Kev I don't have a problem with the 'official' generation having dependencies, either. It's easy to generate the XEPs yourself when you're editing them.
  187. Kev Tobias: No.
  188. Tobias has joined
  189. m&m finally has time to catch up …
  190. m&m 2) I will post my objections to the list by tomorrow (MDT)
  191. m&m 3) apologies for next week; conflicts with JSON WG interim meeting
  192. m&m 4) I can send a summary of the POSH BoF to some list, if people care
  193. bear m&m - please do send POSH summary
  194. Zash +1
  195. m&m ok, I'll send that at least to council@, fwd standards@ … sometime this week
  196. Lance has joined
  197. Tobias has joined
  198. jabberjocke has joined
  199. Zash has joined
  200. Lance has joined
  201. Lance has joined
  202. Lance has joined
  203. Lance has joined
  204. stpeter finally reads http://logs.xmpp.org/council/130814/ and sees that he has no action items so moves on ;-)
  205. Kev I need to do minutes. Probably several sets.
  206. stpeter I think at this point you probably need to sleep :P
  207. m&m sleep is for the weak
  208. Kev It's only 21:30.
  209. m&m (-:
  210. Kev I'll try and get minutes done tomorrow.
  211. stpeter Kev: thanks
  212. Kev The reason I've missed them is almost comical.
  213. Kev It's been hot in the UK (although not any more).
  214. Kev So I had my VM server shut off to save heating my study more than I needed. My TODO lives on one of the VMs. So I had nothing telling me to do minutes :)
  215. stpeter hehehe
  216. m&m sounds perfectly logical to me (-:
  217. stpeter and yes, m&m and I experienced the tail end of the heat when we were in Berlin
  218. m&m ugh
  219. stpeter we Americans are spoiled by the ubiquitous and excessive Air Conditioning™
  220. m&m in our defense, it approached 37C outside …
  221. Tobias just one day :)
  222. m&m it wasn't that much colder the rest of the week! *
  223. m&m * not including the deluges
  224. Tobias not much but a bit, one day was quite rainy though
  225. m&m it was interesting how walking through the InterContinental, there were definite climate zones
  226. Tobias heh
  227. Tobias saw a tornado or so?
  228. m&m a few steps one way, and it went from fairly warm to chilly
  229. stpeter fascinating and totally off-topic: http://twistedsifter.com/2013/08/maps-that-will-help-you-make-sense-of-the-world/
  230. Tobias i find 9 particular surprising
  231. stpeter I liked the literal translations of Chinese names for European countries :-)
  232. Tobias moral-land, hahaha
  233. m&m Braveland!
  234. MattJ That's us!
  235. stpeter cf. map #3 :P
  236. m&m has left
  237. m&m has joined
  238. m&m has left
  239. stpeter heh, http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2013/08/12/the_1931_histomap_the_entire_history_of_the_world_distilled_into_a_single.html is cool too
  240. stpeter although it seems to end in 1931
  241. stpeter wonders who ever dreamed up the idea that PowerPoint was a good way to define technical architectures and protocols and such -- yikes!
  242. m&m has joined
  243. Kev I'm not convinced that claiming the UK uses the metric system is entirely right.
  244. stpeter the UK is in transition, I suppose
  245. MattJ "transition" :)
  246. Kev It's not, though, in any meaningful sense, transitioning.
  247. Kev It's halfway and stuck.
  248. stpeter ah
  249. MattJ As a result, I'm hopeless at kilometres, but useless at yards
  250. stpeter many years ago one used to seek some road signs in kilometers in America, but not often any longer -- and that won't change until Satan buys a snow shovel
  251. Kev Driving distances/speeds are always imperial. Weight of a person is usual imperial. Cooking is a mix. Most things you buy are metric, but often in imperial round numbers. You buy a pint of beer (if your tastebuds are broken). Short distances could be either. Etc.
  252. stpeter s/seek/see/
  253. stpeter I'm looking forward to visiting England again for the IETF meeting next spring (although at the same time I'm working hard to finish up all my IETF work!)
  254. MattJ I'm looking forward to that too, I might finally make it
  255. stpeter I'll definitely plan an XMPP hackfest of some kind
  256. MattJ Excellent :)
  257. stpeter maybe I'll stay busy with IETF stuff through the Hawaii meeting ;-)
  258. Tobias stpeter, hehe
  259. Tobias stpeter, who around the IETF do we have to nag about updating jabber.ietf.org?
  260. stpeter updating the website or the xmpp server?
  261. Tobias xmpp
  262. Tobias they are running some ancient ejabberd
  263. stpeter I'll ping my friends at AMS about that
  264. Tobias thanks :)
  265. stpeter I offered to help them
  266. Tobias they don't have to switch to prosody...but they could at least update to the current ejabberd release
  267. ralphm stpeter: you have people living at the airport?
  268. stpeter switching to Prosody is the plan
  269. ralphm Kev: for what it is worth, even though the Netherlands is mostly metric, there are various things measured in non-round values
  270. MattJ stpeter, maybe poke when 0.9 is out
  271. stpeter MattJ: good plan -- I know they have some hardware migrations to finish first
  272. stpeter note to self: don't set passwords longer than 40 characters, they might be easy to remember but they're hard to type
  273. Neustradamus stpeter: About XSF servers, have you news about updates?
  274. stpeter hmm
  275. stpeter what kind of updates?
  276. Neustradamus Debian 7, M-Link...
  277. stpeter M-Link isn't an XSF matter
  278. stpeter but that's being worked on
  279. stpeter Jonathan Siegle has been working on Debian upgrades
  280. Neustradamus it is on it like ejabberd before... ;)
  281. Neustradamus ok !
  282. ralphm stpeter: I recently learned that three simple dictionary words, separated by spaces, should have enough bits of entropy to be reasonably secure
  283. ralphm Wonder if that's true
  284. Kev I think the usual pattern is four.
  285. Kev But I'll believe that three is sufficient.
  286. Kev Four certainly has more entropy than an 8character alphanumberspecial using the usual rules.
  287. stpeter ralphm: well, this password is for my PGP key, so I was being paranoid :-)
  288. ralphm right
  289. Kev But I think the maths is fairly easy.
  290. Kev Assume 100 valid chars in the usual passwords, so that's 100^8 combinations.
  291. Kev sigsegv:devel/swift/swift/> wc -l /usr/share/dict/words 8:59pm 235886 /usr/share/dict/words
  292. Kev Assume four words, so that's 235886^4 combinations.
  293. Kev >>> 100**8 10000000000000000 >>> 235886**4 3096054976816887360016L
  294. ralphm http://xkcd.com/936/
  295. m&m has left
  296. Kev Yes.
  297. ralphm for those visual learners
  298. stpeter heh, someone pinged just now about an XMPP implementation that doesn't really handle presence correctly for multiple resources -- but it seems that we're not clear about such things in RFC 6121, perhaps because we just assumed that clients would do the right thing about displaying presence correctly (or perhaps we need a XEP on this topic)
  299. stpeter things like "don't show the user as offline just because one of the user's resource sent unavailable"
  300. ralphm hah
  301. m&m has joined
  302. ralphm I've heard many people refer to our priority stuff to bat shit crazy, too
  303. Tobias stpeter, hehe
  304. Tobias i think i stumbled upon that strange sentence while reading up probes stuff
  305. Tobias has left
  306. m&m has left
  307. bear has left
  308. stpeter has left