XMPP Council - 2013-10-09

  1. stpeter has left

  2. m&m has joined

  3. Neustradamus has left

  4. Neustradamus has joined

  5. Lance has joined

  6. Lance has joined

  7. m&m has left

  8. bear has joined

  9. Tobias has joined

  10. Lance has left

  11. Lance has joined

  12. Lance has left

  13. jabberjocke has left

  14. Tobias has joined

  15. bear has left

  16. Tobias has joined

  17. Tobias has left

  18. Tobias has joined

  19. Tobias

    anything on the agenda for today?

  20. Kev

    No new things. And I think I'm the only person with outstanding votes. I'll try to get the minutes for last week out first, but might fail.

  21. Zash has joined

  22. MattJ

    Am I allowed to submit a XEP a couple of hours before the meeting? :)

  23. Tobias

    as long as you don't expect any of us to read it by then

  24. MattJ

    What if it's short?

  25. Kev

    The same stands :)

  26. Tobias has joined

  27. Tobias has joined

  28. stpeter has joined

  29. stpeter has left

  30. Tobias has left

  31. Tobias has joined

  32. ralphm has joined

  33. m&m has joined

  34. stpeter has joined

  35. stpeter has left

  36. m&m

    T - 10 minutes

  37. stpeter has joined

  38. stpeter


  39. ralphm

    MattJ: sure you can :-D

  40. ralphm

    stpeter: hi

  41. Zash has left

  42. Tobias


  43. Kev


  44. Kev

    Every so often I realise that I really do like the diff tool :)

  45. stpeter

    I'm sorry if I've gotten people started on saying "howdy" - I think it's a Western America thing

  46. stpeter

    Kev: a big +1 to that

  47. stpeter

    many thanks to Tobias

  48. Tobias

    i've heard people prefer rfcdiff like diffs

  49. Kev

    That was the implication, I just can't quite come out to say it :D

  50. Kev

    Tobias: With which I'm not familiar. But these work for me.

  51. Kev

    (these = extensions/diff/)

  52. Kev

    Righty, 'tis time.

  53. ralphm

    stpeter: no problem, I know how y'all be doing them things

  54. Tobias

    it's basically two column full text with changes highlighted

  55. Kev

    1) Roll call.

  56. stpeter

    ralphm: hey, y'all is a Southern America thing

  57. stpeter

    I used to say that when I lived in Atlanta :P

  58. ralphm

    stpeter: I'm just mixing the whole lot

  59. ralphm is here

  60. Kev

    I'm here too :)

  61. stpeter

    my favorite construction is "y'all'll"

  62. Tobias

    so am i

  63. stpeter

    but anyway

  64. ralphm

    stpeter: what about cyall?

  65. Tobias

    MattJ, ping

  66. Kev

    m&m: ping

  67. MattJ


  68. MattJ


  69. MattJ


  70. Kev

    Looks a bit like trying to verb presence.

  71. Kev

    Yeah, I'm, like, totally presenced.

  72. stpeter


  73. m&m


  74. m&m

    sorry, got caught in something

  75. Kev

    Excellent. We're all here to not discuss anything.

  76. Kev

    I have nothing on the agenda (although a 301 vote I need to place).

  77. ralphm

    Kev: except for the MattJ proposal

  78. Tobias

    haven't seen it on the list

  79. Kev

    ralphm: The one he didn't send? :)

  80. ralphm

    I'd like to accept that as experimentall

  81. m&m

    I see no proposal

  82. m&m

    therefore it doesn't exist (-:

  83. ralphm


  84. ralphm

    MattJ: what's up with that?

  85. stpeter

    I received it but didn't have time to process it

  86. stpeter

    so it's not in the inbox

  87. MattJ

    It was only submitted to the editor a matter of hours ago

  88. ralphm


  89. MattJ

    It's http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/xep-json.html

  90. Kanchil

    MattJ: http://matthewwild.co.uk/uploads/xep-json.html: XEP-xxxx: JSON container

  91. stpeter

    yeah this stuff like commuting got in the way

  92. Kev

    Next week. Or the week after, or whatever.

  93. Tobias

    MattJ, you could have back dated it a couple weeks ^^

  94. MattJ

    Y'all have to commit to accepting it now, though ;)

  95. ralphm

    Kev: you can read it in 30 seconds

  96. ralphm


  97. Kev

    ralphm: I don't think any harm is going to come of doing it next week :)

  98. Kev

    2) Date of next meeting.

  99. ralphm

    Kev: or from doing it this week

  100. ralphm

    I won't be available next week

  101. ralphm

    I'll be on a plane

  102. Kev

    Me neither.

  103. Kev

    (Although not on a plane)

  104. Kev

    Week after that is summitish?

  105. m&m


  106. ralphm

    Week after I'm on a plane again, I believe

  107. Kev

    And we can't schedule for the 30th anyway, because we won't be Council then.

  108. Kev

    (Vote is on the 29th according to the calendar)

  109. ralphm

    Kev: hence my proposal

  110. stpeter

    MattJ: published to the inbox

  111. Kev

    OK, I'll read it now.

  112. MattJ


  113. stpeter


  114. Kanchil

    stpeter: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/json-containers.html: XEP-xxxx: JSON Containers

  115. m&m

    MattJ: your JSON specification reference is incorrect (-:

  116. MattJ


  117. MattJ


  118. m&m

    depending on which standards body you talk to, its either RFC 4627 or ECMA-404

  119. MattJ

    Yeah, I can fix it to point to the RFC

  120. ralphm

    Not objecting to publish as a XEP.

  121. m&m

    4627bis is in progress

  122. stpeter


  123. Tobias

    or define a new standard...not only Base64 can have tons of standards

  124. m&m

    no objections to publishing, but not terribly excited about it either

  125. m&m

    MattJ: Oh, and specication

  126. Kev

    So, I don't really understand half of this.

  127. ralphm

    m&m: I've been promoting this idea before, wasn't aware that MattJ had written this spec (or I forgot) and Justin Karneges has just published an article about doing the same.

  128. stpeter

    I could definitely see people using JSON containers

  129. Kev

    Shoving it in other protocol namespaces: Understood. Shoving it directly into messages: not understood.

  130. ralphm


  131. MattJ

    People *already* shove JSON into <body/>

  132. Kev

    MattJ: Not in standards, though.

  133. ralphm

    *that* is horrible

  134. MattJ

    I have had to deal with such "APIs" in the past

  135. stpeter


  136. stpeter


  137. m&m

    I agree with Kev

  138. stpeter

    let's at least make it clean

  139. Kev

    If we're telling people how do Do This Right, why not say "And always namespace it according to use"?

  140. waqas has joined

  141. MattJ


  142. m&m

    why not MUST?

  143. stpeter

    nod, the pure message stuff seems strange, IMHO it usually needs some context

  144. ralphm

    Kev: my motivation to accept this is along the same lines as the other payload format XEPs (User Mood, etc)

  145. MattJ

    m&m, the context may be provided elsewhere

  146. ralphm

    I'm not to keen on direct embedding in messages like this

  147. ralphm

    More interested in the pubsub use

  148. MattJ

    Ok, happy to amend it then

  149. m&m

    MattJ: I don't think it will kill them to re-iterate the context

  150. Kev

    I'm happy to accept 0.0.2 as experimental, which says to use contexts.

  151. m&m

    this isn't alg:none bad, but I'm not keen on it

  152. ralphm

    that said, I know some developers have embedded Atom entries in messages as well

  153. MattJ

    If people continue to use JSON in <body/>, I'll mark the date this was decided :)

  154. ralphm

    arguably without context

  155. Kev

    MattJ: If people continue to use <body/>, then demanding context isn't going to be what stops them.

  156. m&m

    MattJ: people put all sorts of things into <body/> — that doesn't make them correct

  157. ralphm

    and I have gotten suggested if we could do something where you'd have the pubsub notification meta data *next to* the payload

  158. Kev

    The spec already says 'shove it in the json namespace'. I don't see "shove the json namespace somewhere relevant" as any harder.

  159. stpeter


  160. MattJ

    It's also more about defining the json element, than dictating what you do with it

  161. ralphm

    Kev: I suppose you can supply context with a sibling element

  162. ralphm

    it doesn't have to be wrapping it

  163. Kev

    ralphm: Using siblings for context is pretty ugly, though.

  164. MattJ

    I don't see why we need rules about where it MUST NOT be embedded

  165. stpeter

    well, I could see that people would know the context from the application they've developed (closed network kind of thing), and entities just pass around json blobs to their heart's content

  166. Kev

    I have a preference for MUST put it in a context, I'll settle for SHOULD and form a concrete opinion before Draft.

  167. Kev

    Or new Council can, rather.

  168. stpeter nods to Kev

  169. m&m


  170. MattJ

    I'm ok for compromising to SHOULD

  171. stpeter

    rough consensus! ;-)

  172. MattJ


  173. ralphm


  174. Kev


  175. ralphm

    and we have another XEP

  176. ralphm


  177. MattJ

    I'll update it ASAP

  178. Kev

    ralphm: I don't think we have a Tobias opinion yet.

  179. Kev

    At least, I can't find it.

  180. m&m

    MattJ: don't forget to change the namespace to end with ":0" instead of ":tmp"

  181. Zash

    ... Mam

  182. Tobias

    Kev, i'm fine with SHOULD for now too

  183. m&m

    Kev: we're still pending MattJ's update, though

  184. Kev

    m&m: I'm happy to pre-approve this one.

  185. Kev

    But I'm not pushing anyone else to do so.

  186. ralphm

    m&m: I strongly believe in publish, then discuss details

  187. m&m

    I've already stated non-objection

  188. Kev

    I think this is our last meeting, so I think we're punting for next Council if we don't decide today.

  189. Kev

    (Not that this is a problem)

  190. ralphm

    m&m: right

  191. Kev

    Ok, so everyone is non-objecting the pending 0.0.2?

  192. m&m

    as long as something doesn't smell like duplication (without justification) or have very obvious flaws, I don't object

  193. MattJ


  194. ralphm

    Kev: I think I've seen no objections from everyone(!)

  195. Kev


  196. Kev

    3) Date of next.

  197. Kev

    I think we're saying that this was our last meeting.

  198. m&m

    it sounds like "none"

  199. m&m


  200. Tobias


  201. Kev

    In which case

  202. Kev

    4) Ta.

  203. MattJ

    ok, me too

  204. ralphm

    Thanks all!

  205. Kev

    I'd like to thank everyone for their work this year.

  206. MattJ


  207. Tobias

    thank you

  208. ralphm

    You've been a pleasure to work with.

  209. Kev

    5) Any other business

  210. Tobias

    Kev, thanks for chairing

  211. m&m


  212. ralphm


  213. Zash

    Thanks yall

  214. m&m

    I've decided not to run again

  215. Kev

    m&m: You can always come back later, you've done it before :)

  216. ralphm


  217. m&m

    I've struggled to keep up as it is (-:

  218. Tobias

    and for those reappliers, there are a couple days left to put yourself on the wiki page

  219. m&m

    but I also think it would be best for there to be new blood

  220. MattJ

    After swinging to and fro for a while, I finally decided to run again

  221. Kev

    I think we're guaranteed at least some new blood next year then, and yes, I agree this is healthy.

  222. stpeter checks http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board_and_Council_Elections_2013

  223. Kanchil

    stpeter: http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Board_and_Council_Elections_2013: Board and Council Elections 2013 - XMPP Wiki

  224. Kev

    But despite that, I decided to run again :)

  225. Kev


  226. stpeter


  227. Kev

    I think we're out of other businesses?

  228. Kev

    In which case...

  229. m&m

    I could always vote "no" for you (-:

  230. m&m

    none from me

  231. Kev

    m&m: So can everyone else :)

  232. Kev

    ...Thanks y'all.

  233. stpeter

    all hail the 12th council :-)

  234. Kev bangs the final gavel.

  235. MattJ

    Thanks Kev

  236. m&m

    thanks very much everyone

  237. stpeter

    indeed, thanks Kev!

  238. stpeter

    I have a sense that m&m might be back someday :-)

  239. m&m


  240. m&m


  241. stpeter

    heck, even I might run for the Council again sometime

  242. m&m

    I always find myself drawn to legacy JSON

  243. m&m


  244. stpeter


  245. m&m goes back to I-Ds and cross-SDO shinanigans

  246. Zash has left

  247. bear has joined

  248. Tobias has left

  249. Kev

    stpeter: And I'm +1 on 301.

  250. stpeter


  251. m&m has left

  252. m&m has joined

  253. Tobias has joined

  254. Zash has joined

  255. Zash has left

  256. Lance has joined

  257. ralphm has left

  258. ralphm has joined

  259. m&m has left

  260. m&m has joined

  261. stpeter has left

  262. stpeter has joined

  263. m&m has left

  264. Lance has left

  265. stpeter has left

  266. Lance has joined

  267. Tobias has left

  268. m&m has joined

  269. Tobias has joined

  270. stpeter has joined

  271. stpeter has left

  272. stpeter has joined

  273. Tobias has left

  274. Tobias has joined

  275. m&m has left

  276. m&m has joined

  277. m&m has left

  278. m&m has joined

  279. Lance has joined

  280. stpeter has left

  281. stpeter has joined

  282. stpeter has left

  283. Tobias has left

  284. Tobias has joined

  285. m&m has left

  286. ralphm has left