jonas’Ge0rG, you may be intersted in what I wrote about PR#971 on-list just now.
jonas’may help guide the discussion about that PR today
Ge0rGjonas’: great, thanks
jonas’(Re: [Standards] Council Minutes 2020-07-22, really just now, so it’ll arrive on-list probably five minutes after the meeting started, as the list server hates me :))
Ge0rGjonas’: as you'll also only arrive after the meeting started, I hope this won't be much of an issue ;)
jonas’it also contians my vote on the PR as-is, which is a -1, so if any of you have strong opinions on that, it’d be good if we discussed them now...
jonas’Ge0rG, I’ll not arrive at all today, sooo...
Ge0rGjonas’: well, that's surely also after the meeting start ;)
jonas’Ge0rG, mail passed through
jonas’note that the vote expires this week.
Ge0rGI'm working on a new variant of the MUC-PM diff
Ge0rG1) Roll Call
Ge0rGjonas’ is excused.
Ge0rGDo we have a dwd?
Ge0rGAnyway, it looks like a quorum, so let's proceed.
ZashDoes not look like we do
Ge0rG2) Agenda Bashing
Ge0rGjonas’ isn't here, so feel free to bash as much as you want.
Ge0rGI wanted to add a follow-up to https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/854 but will postpone for another Council Meeting
Ge0rGjonas’ provided some more context on PR#972, which we could discuss later.
Ge0rGDoesn't look like there are any other additions.
Ge0rG3) Editor’s Update
Ge0rGI put on my jonas’ hat.
Ge0rG- XEP-0048 (Bookmarks) deprecated in favour of XEP-0402 (PEP Native Bookmarks)
- Ongoing Calls:
- Last Call for XEP-0352 (Client State Indication), ends on 2020-08-18
- Last Call for XEP-0411 (Bookmark Conversion), ends on 2020-08-18
Ge0rGokay, enough of the cosplay.
Ge0rG4) Items for voting
Ge0rG4a) Discuss PR#971: XEP-0004: Clarify field type omission for 'submit' and 'result' form field types
Ge0rGthis is a recurring topic that's apparently expiring today.
Ge0rGjonas’ vetoed it on-list today, with some advice on how to improve the wording
ZashI tried to read that on my phone, it sounded sensible.
Ge0rGI was confused before, at how removing words can increase the clarity, but with jonas’’ remark about type="error" being undefined, I think that it actually doesn't improve the situation and should be reworded in a better way
Zashsame, -1, "what jonas said" 🙂
Ge0rGdaniel: would you like to add to this?
danielwhat jonas said. -1
Ge0rGThanks everyone. Looks like dwd is going to expire from this.
Ge0rG5) Pending Votes
Ge0rGI'd also like to +1 PR#963, so that I'm down to zero pending now.
Ge0rGZash: did you vote on #972 already? This is just a formalism though.
ZashThe other xep4 one? I think I did
Ge0rGit's not in the spreadsheet of doom.
Ge0rGwell, it's vetoed multiple times anyway, so it wouldn't make a difference.
Ge0rG6) Date of Next
Ge0rGgreat! Let's assume +1W then
ZashI got nothing
Ge0rGAnybody? I have https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/854 for which I wanted to discuss some wording.
Ge0rGI want to add a rationale along the lines of "if you send a PM to somebody who's also your contact, it might be rendered as coming from a separate person"
Ge0rGbut I fail to find the right words that are adequate for a formal standards document
ZashMaybe this is more for ModernXMPP?
danielThe discoverabilty of modern xmpp is questionable at best
Ge0rGAlso modernxmpp is not a stick you can wield to convince developers to improve their sh... app
danielI find should not too strong for a retroactive recommendation
Ge0rGSHOULD was discouraged last time I brought this topic up
Ge0rGAnd then I totally forgot to make a new proposal, which I just recently rediscovered.
ZashHiding it deep in 0045 isn't optimal for discoverability either 😛
Ge0rGbut it's something that I can point developers to
MattJand you can't point them to modernxmpp.org?
Ge0rGMattJ: I can point them to <anyrandomwebsite>, but it's not convincing.
MattJI'm certainly not against having it in the XEP, but I don't see that much difference
Ge0rGwell, I *can* try to convince a developer by linking to modernxmpp, just to see if it works.
MattJIt's not more discoverable, and it's a protocol document while you're discussing UX considerations
MattJThe primary benefit is that it's XSF-official
Ge0rGbut I am focusing on protocol considerations that arise from UX considerations.
Ge0rGthat's a very strong benefit.
ZashIf SHOULD is too strong then maybe just an implementation note.. but then modernxmpp seems marginally better IMO
Ge0rGalso it adds significantly to the discoverability
danielYes in any case there is too much should and should not in that pr