jdev - 2026-03-18

I am considering changing my clients to always show messages in MAM order instead of in timestamp order -- with a UI flag to note when a message is "out of order" due to delay tag -- is anyone else doing this?

what would be the benefit? it sounds much more complicated

The MAM order is surely canonical?

especially because most servers support now sub second timestamps, so timestamp is as reliable

i mean we discussed this a long time ago, to store the order into the database without relying on attributes MAM gives you, is a non-trivial task

if you want to do more than, load messages from the last known stanza-id in forward order

I have them stored in MAM order in my database already, that part isn't too hard. But also I should have been clear I mean it's basically equivalent to mam-timestamp-order but not eg using original sender <delay> to influence order at all

is the idea I'm having UI wise

yes, im not in the reorder messages on delay camp

i display a icon and user can see the info

so you always show in "received order" with an icon indicating the message was delayed?

i hope i dont lie about how it currently is, i would have to look it up, what i can say is, that if you would ask me to implement today i would do it that way

i think its also easier with other functionality, determining if a chat is read, or showing which messages are unread, becomes also much more complicated if you need to expect, that in a bunch of read old messages is somewhere a unread message

right. that's part of why i implemented mam order is for better read/unread and last-id logic

> I am considering changing my clients to always show messages in MAM order instead of in timestamp order -- with a UI flag to note when a message is "out of order" due to delay tag -- is anyone else doing this? isn't that what conversations does? ↺

No. Conversations temporarily shows it in received order during first receipt with a header. Then moves it into the past on re render