XMPP Council - 2016-10-12

I'm here. :-)

it is time

0) Roll call

Here

Tobias Dave Cridland

Hello

I'm not aware of new items for voting

There is still https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/219 needing votes from Dave and Matt

Oops, thanks

and from psa

1) Date of next

sbtsbc?

wfm

#219 is fine by me. I've spent years arguing for it, after all.

ta

Erm, AOB.

2) AOB?

There's an IoT SIG proposal; whose call is that do we think?

Ours?

The Board approves new SIGs, I think.

At least, I specified that the Board is the approving body this time (we haven't created a SIG in quite awhile).

Tobias, nice try ;)

psa, I think it can be either, but I noticed you sent it to the Board.

MattJ, I was impressed by the effort.

In the distant past, SIGs were all approved by the Board IIRC.

MattJ, I sent it 5 min ago. Just had no connection

Who do we want to approve it?

I'll be asking the same question in Board later, I just wondered what Council folks thought.

My feeling is that the Board needs to approve SIGs, but the Council should provide technical guidance where needed.

That sounds reasonable to me

OK, I'll note that to the Board.

thanks Dave

AOAOB?

NOAOB.

thanks all

Oops, I meant to ask about http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/message-deletion.html

That was approved and never published, right?

not approved iirc, there were some concerns that needed to be fixed

I looked at it earlier, actually, thanks to your reminder yesterday, MattJ - made me uneasy to look at it. Gut feeling is that it's never actually going to delete a message, and it's one of those cases where I think the naming is significant.

Tombstone ?

"retract" is the term we've used before.

Yeah, I'd prefer that too

Right. It's one step stronger than a message correction that sets the body to empty string

If this were MIX, it *would* be a retract, I suppose.

So what I would like is a defined thing to replace deleted/retracted/whatever messages in a MAM archive

Since we can't actually remove the message without breaking sync

Like a tombstone?

Or retract in the past tense

Like a tombstone

is that necessary at the protocol level, or something needed internally for a server?

Necessary at the protocol level

Well, strongly desired at least

The problem is if you delete a message whose id a client was using as a sync point - the next time the client comes online and requests for all messages since that one, the server would find it didn't exist and send the whole archive (as per the spec)

so something like replacing the contents of the stanza with <retracted by='...' xmlns='...' /> ?

Yes

and still sending that in the history results?

That makes good sense to me; it's consistent with how message editing does it and means you can always get a valid snapshot of history at any given time (whereas if you actually delete the messaeg and then try to sync "all history up to 5 minutes ago" you won't see the message even if it did exist 5 minutes ago

SamWhited: agreed - making it consistent with message editing is especially appealing

Do we need something separate from a message correction?

Zash, I think so

It means that if clients support editing, but not retraction they can advertise that; that's and it's just nice semantically to make them distinct, but I'm not sure that's important

I think we do care about semantics.

Sounds good to me :) it certainly "feels" right to me, I just don't have a good objective argument for why it's important.

i think the main distinction is that this is primarily meant to be a moderation and 'cleanup' tool. think a muc room getting spammed with dozens of messages. corrections alone don't quite convey the right intent

especially since (iirc) corrections doesn't cover the case of someone else (room admin/moderator) sending a correction for someone else's message

ah, good point

Added a card I forgot about for next time; I'm not entirely sure this needs council approval, but I never remember… https://trello.com/c/Jedp9SQX/119-vote-on-https-github-com-xsf-xeps-pull-250

SamWhited that looks all editorial, nothing needed from council here

Sounds good; I'll go ahead and archive that card then. Sorry for the noise.

no worries. noise is good :)

Without noise, there's no signal

such wisdom from ralphm

ok, I just sent a PR to update the message deletion protoxep based on the conversation earlier

Ralphm is the zen master of online communications :)

Heh