XSF Editor Team - 2017-09-19


  1. moparisthebest

    friendly poke for any available editor to issue XEP-0368 call for experience :)

  2. jonasw

    moparisthebest, I’m still not sure on how the process works, sorry.

  3. jonasw

    moparisthebest, but I’ll give it a shot now anyways

  4. moparisthebest

    jonasw, I don't think anyone is, how about just an email like "Subject: Call for Experience: XEP-0368" "The council is going to consider moving this to final and is looking for feedback" or something

  5. moparisthebest

    I'm bad with words :)

  6. jonasw

    I can’t simply say council is going to do anything unless council said so

  7. moparisthebest

    that's what xep-0001 says though

  8. jonasw

    XEP-0001 says that the editor (without specifying what triggers this) issues a CFE *before* the XEP is laid before council for advancement.

  9. jonasw

    there’s nothing in XEP-0001 (I thnik, point me to it if I’m wrong) which says that council MUST look at something which has been CFE’d

  10. moparisthebest

    right, that's what I'm looking to get to happen

  11. jonasw

    I’m still trying to figure out what stops me from issuing CFEs for all (old enough) Draft XEPs at once

  12. moparisthebest

    oh yea, but it'll be presented to them at least 14 days after anyway

  13. jonasw

    it seems fishy :)

  14. jonasw

    anyways, let’s give this a shot

  15. moparisthebest

    yea jonasw I'm just trying to push it towards final I only know what xep-1 says and it seems like next step is for editor to send email so :shrug: :)

  16. jonasw

    somebody will complain if we did anything wrong

  17. moparisthebest

    that's kind of what I figured, if it's wrong, xep-1 should be clarified

  18. jonasw

    you’re the author, right?

  19. moparisthebest

    yep

  20. jonasw

    okay

  21. jonasw

    there you go, email sent (will take a minute or two to propagate through the list)

  22. moparisthebest

    thanks much

  23. jonasw

    will also comment on it once the mail got through, I actually implemented it.

  24. moparisthebest

    oh yea in your client, library, or both?

  25. jonasw

    library

  26. jonasw

    (from which follows, client)

  27. jonasw

    (I didn’t bother with implementing an off switch)

  28. moparisthebest

    yea I was going to try to pull up all implementations I know about in a mail later

  29. moparisthebest

    dwd said he implemented it in a server, it's the only s2s implementation I know of, there are a few client ones iirc

  30. moparisthebest

    it's arguably much more useful for clients

  31. jonasw

    there you go

  32. moparisthebest

    thanks

  33. Guus

    368 appendix A - Short Name: NOT_YET_ASSIGNED ... If this is going from draft to final, it's likely never getting one?

  34. Guus

    (perhaps simply remove that line?)

  35. Guus

    also, section 4 starts with a undefined referal: "this provides". It being the start of a paragraph titled "Use Cases", makes it unclear if 'this' refers to the entire XEP, or rather the ALPN description in the previous paragraph. I'd reword it slightly.

  36. SamWhited

    I think the council assigns a short name when it goes to draft or final.

  37. Guus

    in unrelated news: I'm going to have a beautiful bike shed. Been working on its plans for years.

  38. Guus

    xep-0053 suggests short names can be assigned as early as when a xep is published as experimental: "When a XEP is first published in the Experimental state, the XMPP Registrar shall work with the author(s) to mint an appropriate namespace name, which shall be of the form "urn:xmpp:ShortName:0" or, where appropriate, "urn:xmpp:ShortName:SubName:0"

  39. Guus

    I don't care to much, by the way. I just thought the 'yet' part was misplaced in something that's about to be 'final'