XSF Discussion - 2017-11-07

00:10:05 Ge0rG has left
00:14:22 Ge0rG has left
00:18:24 efrit has left
00:23:32 Arc no its pretty much what we already have. as long as the characters are shown i think its good. KISS.
00:23:48 Arc escape characters make it overly complex
00:23:52 Ge0rG has left
00:27:04 moparisthebest I always want to say something is KISS but I wasn't sure if it translated or might insult someone :)
00:27:41 Arc Keep It Simple Stupid
00:27:51 Steve Kille has left
00:27:54 Arc thats a very old one.
00:29:55 SouL has left
00:30:47 SamWhited *nods* sounds good to me.
00:39:14 lumi has left
00:39:23 @Alacer has joined
00:43:22 Ge0rG has left
00:45:47 Arc i was putting together a media attachements xep last winter
00:45:54 Arc i think we even added support for it
00:47:47 Arc https://pastebin.ca/3905635
00:48:33 Arc what we didnt resolve is ensuring that <thumb> accurately reflected the media being shared.
00:50:06 Arc URLs are difficult regardless. you certainly cant have clients autoloading them because they can unmask anonymity
00:53:52 Ge0rG has left
01:01:12 Syndace has joined
01:01:59 Valerian has left
01:02:03 Valerian has joined
01:02:26 bjc has left
01:12:23 Ge0rG has left
01:13:01 vanitasvitae has left
01:22:48 Guus has left
01:23:52 Ge0rG has left
01:24:00 Valerian has left
01:33:12 daniel has left
01:35:22 daniel has joined
01:36:59 Guus has left
01:40:18 Ge0rG has left
01:53:53 Ge0rG has left
01:56:39 pep. SamWhited, I honestly wonder if you are ignoring all feedback from the previous XHTML-IM thread. but then it's time to sleep, I'll try to post on the list tomorrow
01:56:45 daniel has left
01:56:52 daniel has joined
01:56:59 SamWhited I was wondering if everyone was ignoring my responses to all feedback from the previous thread.
01:57:08 pep. :)
01:57:28 SamWhited But maybe we shouldn't get into that, because that's going to be an unproductive discussion. Please explain what you think was ignored instead of making inflamatory statements.
01:57:51 pep. Sure, I'll post on the list, going to bed now
01:58:02 daniel has left
01:58:09 daniel has joined
02:01:52 Tobias has joined
02:08:53 Ge0rG has left
02:09:03 daniel has left
02:09:36 Ge0rG has left
02:09:39 daniel has joined
02:13:28 la|r|ma has joined
02:15:40 Steve Kille has left
02:19:12 daniel has left
02:19:17 Tobias has joined
02:19:25 daniel has joined
02:23:53 Ge0rG has left
02:29:23 daniel has left
02:29:31 daniel has joined
02:29:57 Arc I'm really not interested in arguments that xhtml-im can be hypothetically implemented in a secure manner. its been in use for a long, long time and I'm not aware of a single secure implementation of it.
02:30:28 Arc the thin benefits it provides to users cannot possible outweigh the risks
02:33:53 Ge0rG has left
02:34:47 Ge0rG has left
02:35:16 Steve Kille has left
02:39:24 Ge0rG has left
02:46:54 sonny has left
02:46:57 sonny has joined
02:47:16 bjc has left
02:49:15 bjc has joined
02:50:47 daniel has left
02:52:33 daniel has joined
02:53:34 Steve Kille has left
02:55:17 Ge0rG has left
02:59:26 moparisthebest Xhtml-im's main benefit is it's easy
02:59:53 moparisthebest That's also it's main downfall, easy to shoot yourself in the foot
03:08:54 Ge0rG has left
03:16:15 Guus has left
03:23:54 Ge0rG has left
03:26:50 la|r|ma has joined
03:31:10 Syndace has joined
03:31:14 Syndace has joined
03:31:21 lskdjf has joined
03:38:54 Ge0rG has left
03:42:01 daniel has left
03:45:17 jere has joined
03:46:28 daniel has joined
03:53:54 Ge0rG has left
04:05:39 daniel has left
04:05:41 daniel has joined
04:08:54 Ge0rG has left
04:12:28 Arc we had a presentation at ctrlh two weeks ago on "sanitized" html
04:12:38 Steve Kille has left
04:13:01 Arc different browsers parse slightly different, and in those differences, you can sneak script through
04:16:26 Arc in one of the examples he used a utf8 quote inside <img width=> to get the sanitizer to believe it was all part of the value, but then include a ton of extra stuff
04:17:37 SamWhited that's a good one I haven't seen before
04:18:02 Steve Kille has left
04:19:59 Arc it was one of the trickier ones, and they all were limited to certain browsers
04:20:40 daniel has left
04:21:16 daniel has joined
04:21:58 Arc the other presentation was on a USB charging cable a guy had made with a GSM modem and SIM card slot hidden in it, and it would start uploading data from the users phone when they plugged it in
04:23:54 Ge0rG has left
04:24:54 Zash Arc: Would that still work after some round trips through an XML parser?
04:26:11 Arc idk, i guess it depends on the exploit
04:26:32 Arc some of them had quotes within quoted values
04:27:02 Arc at least one of them relied on the sanitizer modifying the value to remove escapes
04:31:01 Steve Kille has left
04:32:41 Arc anyway they were all web-based examples and the main takeaway was if you need to allow html, put it in an iframe loaded from outside your trusted domain. such as every message from the same user from <user>.usermsg.mydomain so if they do manage to run javascript, it won't be able to access anything else
04:33:01 Arc thats actually not a solution i had considered in dealing with the candy problem
04:33:45 Arc ive been trying to find the video of the presentation but i dont think its been uploaded yet
04:37:59 nyco has left
04:38:05 nyco has joined
04:38:55 Ge0rG has left
04:50:41 uc has joined
04:51:13 daniel has left
04:51:21 daniel has joined
04:55:17 Ge0rG has left
05:00:44 SamWhited has left
05:01:11 daniel has left
05:01:17 daniel has joined
05:02:55 Guus has left
05:05:27 bjc has left
05:08:54 Zash has left
05:08:54 Zash has left
05:08:55 Ge0rG has left
05:09:08 Zash has joined
05:21:10 @Alacer has left
05:21:28 Ge0rG has left
05:21:28 Guus has left
05:21:29 @Alacer has joined
05:25:17 Ge0rG has left
05:28:19 Ge0rG has left
05:32:01 bjc has left
05:36:06 bjc has joined
05:36:19 waqas has joined
05:37:51 moparisthebest Arc: plain old CSP header doesn't protect you?
05:38:33 daniel has left
05:40:08 daniel has joined
05:40:18 Ge0rG has left
05:42:14 tux has joined
05:53:55 Ge0rG has left
05:54:47 moparisthebest has joined
06:06:19 Tobias has joined
06:10:17 Ge0rG has left
06:17:00 Guus has left
06:17:34 @Alacer has left
06:17:34 waqas has left
06:19:09 @Alacer has joined
06:23:03 Ge0rG has left
06:24:16 jcbrand has joined
06:25:17 Ge0rG has left
06:25:51 jcbrand has left
06:26:03 Arc afaik that only works with an iframe
06:26:09 Arc which means every msg must be in an iframe
06:26:57 Arc has left
06:26:57 Arc has joined
06:27:23 intosi has joined
06:33:44 jcbrand has joined
06:35:28 jcbrand has left
06:35:47 Steve Kille has left
06:36:58 daniel has left
06:37:01 daniel has joined
06:38:55 Ge0rG has left
06:40:48 Guus has left
06:41:53 arc has left
06:41:54 arc has joined
06:43:19 Arc has left
06:44:50 Guus has left
06:45:39 tux has joined
06:45:43 tux has joined
06:49:57 arc has left
06:49:58 arc has joined
06:50:49 Guus has left
06:55:17 Ge0rG has left
06:58:43 daniel has left
06:58:49 daniel has joined
07:01:08 Guus has left
07:04:25 Guus has left
07:04:42 Steve Kille has left
07:08:56 Ge0rG has left
07:09:24 Steve Kille has left
07:10:40 daniel has left
07:10:46 daniel has joined
07:14:26 jonasw CSP could work, I think, if you say that no inline script whatsoever is allowed and all scripts you need for operation come via script tags
07:14:36 jonasw (and then some strict policy where those scripts can come from etc.)
07:15:48 arc has left
07:16:13 arc has joined
07:19:23 arc has left
07:20:07 arc has joined
07:20:08 Ge0rG has left
07:22:45 Steve Kille has left
07:26:00 Steve Kille has left
07:30:54 daniel has left
07:30:57 daniel has joined
07:31:29 Guus has left
07:33:08 Steve Kille has left
07:34:57 Steve Kille has left
07:35:39 daniel has left
07:35:46 daniel has joined
07:38:05 Ge0rG has joined
07:38:05 Ge0rG has joined
07:38:05 Ge0rG has left
07:38:05 Ge0rG has left
07:38:05 Ge0rG has joined
07:38:37 Ge0rG has joined
07:41:31 Zash has left
07:41:38 Ge0rG has left
07:41:47 Ge0rG has joined
07:45:58 Arc has joined
07:46:38 Ge0rG has left
07:47:00 Steve Kille has left
07:47:19 Ge0rG has left
07:50:04 jcbrand has joined
07:50:42 nyco has left
07:51:14 daniel has left
07:51:18 daniel has joined
07:53:36 nyco has joined
07:59:43 mimi89999 has left
08:02:55 Ge0rG has left
08:02:55 Ge0rG has left
08:02:55 Ge0rG has left
08:02:55 Ge0rG has left
08:03:15 daniel has left
08:04:06 daniel has joined
08:09:49 Ge0rG has joined
08:10:39 daniel has left
08:10:43 daniel has joined
08:22:10 Steve Kille has left
08:22:22 intosi has left
08:25:15 daniel has left
08:25:19 daniel has joined
08:31:13 daniel has left
08:31:48 daniel has joined
08:34:39 goffi has joined
08:35:38 Steve Kille has left
08:37:45 Steve Kille has joined
08:43:22 daniel has left
08:43:28 daniel has joined
08:45:29 daniel has left
08:45:42 daniel has joined
08:54:09 Steve Kille has left
08:54:15 intosi has joined
08:59:02 vanitasvitae has left
09:04:04 arc has left
09:04:09 arc has joined
09:05:40 Arc has left
09:07:05 vanitasvitae has joined
09:08:48 Ge0rG has left
09:13:35 ralphm has left
09:14:46 @Alacer has left
09:16:59 daniel has left
09:17:27 @Alacer has joined
09:17:48 Martin has joined
09:21:36 daniel has left
09:25:19 daniel has left
09:26:52 daniel has left
09:29:29 daniel has left
09:31:13 daniel has left
09:32:31 daniel has left
09:38:30 ralphm has left
09:42:43 Zash has left
09:52:36 Martin has left
09:52:37 Martin has joined
09:57:21 jonasw has left
10:14:47 Martin has left
10:21:12 zinid has left
10:22:11 marc has joined
10:26:28 la|r|ma has joined
10:32:22 daniel has left
10:43:03 Ge0rG has joined
10:48:03 daniel has left
10:49:00 lskdjf has joined
10:49:04 Alex has joined
10:52:42 daniel has left
10:55:28 intosi has left
10:57:52 la|r|ma has left
10:59:00 la|r|ma has left
10:59:38 la|r|ma has joined
11:00:28 la|r|ma has left
11:00:46 la|r|ma has left
11:01:03 la|r|ma has left
11:01:28 Ge0rG has left
11:01:29 la|r|ma has left
11:03:20 Syndace About the proposed styling XEP: What do you need service discovery for? I thought a key point of this spec was, that it doesn't matter whether the receiver supports this XEP or not.
11:04:40 vanitasvitae has left
11:05:28 Ge0rG has left
11:08:27 la|r|ma has left
11:09:20 Ge0rG has left
11:13:10 jere has joined
11:20:50 daniel Syndace, yes I agree. I was meaning to propose getting rid of that. but it doesn't really hurt either so and there were more important things to talk about
11:26:25 daniel has left
11:27:44 daniel has left
11:30:27 sonny has left
11:30:32 sonny has joined
11:33:15 Kev has joined
11:42:48 Zash has left
11:44:35 Tobias has left
11:45:31 lumi has joined
11:55:28 Kev has left
11:57:16 daniel has left
11:57:51 daniel has left
12:13:38 tux has left
12:15:26 Alex has left
12:18:25 Guus has left
12:18:35 Alex has joined
12:20:43 Zash has left
12:21:31 daniel has left
12:26:29 mimi89999 has joined
12:26:36 jere has left
12:26:45 jere has joined
12:28:10 la|r|ma has left
12:28:38 Guus has left
12:32:25 jabberatdemo has joined
12:33:02 Alex has left
12:33:40 Alex has joined
12:35:45 Alex has left
12:35:50 Alex has joined
12:36:57 Guus has left
12:37:16 Flow Syndace, even if disco is not required by the protocol, it's still nice that you can use it to get an idea how widespread it is implemented
12:38:30 Syndace Flow, but it's a MUST
12:39:06 Valerian has joined
12:39:15 Flow Syndace, and that is problematic because? (Although I can see that a SHOULD may be ok too)
12:40:28 jabberatdemo has left
12:43:50 Syndace I just personally don't see how the discovery should be used. My $client won't behave any different if it detects support or not. It won't strip out asterisks just because the reveicing person does not advertise support.
12:44:28 Syndace IMO it's always a good idea to keep specifications as thin as possible, only including things that are needed for it to work.
12:44:39 Syndace And disco is definitely not required for it to work
12:45:37 Syndace I mean, all clients available probably support XEP-0030 so its no additional work in that specific case but still, why require something you don't need.
12:45:38 Guus has left
12:46:41 Syndace Though I'm fine with looking at more important things first, as danial said
12:47:28 jere has joined
12:47:35 jubalh has joined
12:47:54 jubalh has left
12:59:56 Alex has left
13:02:46 Flow Syndace, as I said, it allows you to get an impression how widespread the xep is implemented
13:04:13 Flow You may argue that it's more overhead for little benefit, but I think I would disagree with that
13:05:31 moparisthebest if it's just for "an impression for how widespread it's implemented" then it should go away
13:05:51 moparisthebest that's what looking at code is for, it's not like there are so many clients you can't tell
13:06:43 Guus Discussions like these are why we can't have nice things, guys. Lets fine-tune later.
13:08:15 zinid Guus: for example? :)
13:09:45 Guus zinid: we (myself included) are bikeshedding to much, in my opinion. That causes us to not be very productive, which in turn fuels the argument that XMPP is outdated / obsolete.
13:09:59 Guus I feel that we need to build momentum.
13:11:00 Syndace has left
13:11:42 moparisthebest rushing crappy specs to production is a problem at the other end of the spectrum though
13:11:56 zinid isn't all this xhtml/mardown rantings a bikeshedding? :)
13:12:02 dwd moparisthebest, I'd love our problem to be that we design and implement things too quickly.
13:12:10 dwd zinid, Much of it, yes.
13:12:24 zinid like this is the most serious problem in xmpp?
13:12:33 zinid where are the priorities?
13:12:39 zinid we don't have avatars working goddamit
13:12:43 Guus moparisthebest: now that I have you: could you enlighten me on a SSHL confusion that I have
13:13:01 Guus did the config file syntax change between 17 and 18, or am I missing a file?
13:13:17 moparisthebest it didn't change, but the sni/alpn stuff was added in 18
13:13:56 moparisthebest and you used to be able to get away without a config file and specify everything as command line args, but with alpn/sni you need the config file
13:14:19 Guus aaah! Then that's likely it.
13:14:23 moparisthebest I need to write up the page on the wiki again, I just lost everything and haven't got around to it
13:15:50 Guus I think I got confused by the duplicate file name of /etc/default/sslh.conf and a missing file that likely should go in /etc/sslh ?
13:16:21 lskdjf has joined
13:16:23 lskdjf has joined
13:17:09 moparisthebest normally it's /etc/default/sslh (which is a shell script) and /etc/sslh.conf or /etc/sslh/sslh.conf which is the config file
13:17:15 moparisthebest not sure how debian packages it these days though
13:17:39 Flow Guus, I don't think that this is the reason we are not productive
13:17:59 moparisthebest Guus, until I get around to it there is a bit of an explanation here: https://wiki.debian.org/InstallingProsody#XMPP_over_HTTPS
13:18:09 moparisthebest even though the section title is totally wrong, just ignore that :)
13:18:23 Guus Thanks
13:18:30 Guus Flow: every bit helps.
13:19:02 Flow The reason is that we try to reach consensus on an to early stage. It should be normal to have multiple (partly) competiting experimental XEPs
13:20:15 Flow It would probably help to get the MUC-NG thing that is currently restricted to just what MIXs experiments with
13:23:45 Alex has left
13:25:07 dwd We should write a new file transfer protocol, too. Been a while since we did one of those.
13:25:37 intosi has joined
13:26:01 moparisthebest also how about SRV records for connecting over QUIC
13:26:04 Kev Bittorrent is hot, I hear.
13:28:49 dwd Kev, Not obscure enough for us. Maybe IPFS over XMPP?
13:29:14 Valerian has left
13:31:05 Ge0rG Can't we just add our chat messages to the blockchain and call it a day?
13:31:58 Kev dwd: I'm referring to a particular summit discussion. 2007, maybe.
13:32:46 Guus Kev: pics or it didn't happen.
13:33:14 Kev It's a discussion that would have been better to not have happened.
13:33:17 Kev So I'm ok with that.
13:33:34 Guus :)
13:33:49 dwd Kev, Ah... I think that might be the summit before I started doing anything serious.
13:37:35 Kev has left
13:37:45 Alex has left
13:38:43 Guus You've been serious for 10 years now? auch!
13:39:07 daniel has left
13:41:10 dwd Guus, Well, serious with XMPP is around 2004, actually. But I don't think I turned up to Summits straight away. Serious with Open Standards more generally goes back to 1997 or so.
13:49:29 edhelas serious dwd is serious since 1997
13:50:54 dwd Well, when I say "serious"...
13:57:01 lovetox has joined
13:57:13 jere has left
13:57:21 jere has joined
14:02:31 waqas has joined
14:03:04 bjc has left
14:03:25 lskdjf has joined
14:03:28 lskdjf has joined
14:07:47 bra has joined
14:10:23 mathieui https://events.ccc.de/2017/11/04/people-34c3/ btw
14:11:20 jubalh has joined
14:13:08 daniel mathieui: the people I talked to thus far aren't really interested in an actual assembly. (=having a physical space). I just submitted my xmpp talk to the fsfe assembly
14:15:04 mathieui well, saying "let’s meet up at time X" should be good enough
14:15:20 Valerian has joined
14:16:26 Alex has joined
14:17:31 bjc has left
14:19:16 Guus oh, that's to bad. There's plenty of you going
14:19:58 bjc has joined
14:24:25 Alex has left
14:25:19 bjc has left
14:26:56 Alex has joined
14:27:19 bjc has joined
14:32:52 daniel has left
14:35:22 daniel has left
14:37:30 Ge0rG What is the accepted behavior for candidates in the vote on themselves? abstain once and vote 4 others? Vote 5 others? Not vote at all?
14:38:11 daniel Just vote for yourself. Who cares
14:38:21 MattJ As far as I understand, you're allowed to vote for yourself, so if you think you should be in, vote
14:38:35 daniel Except if you believe you aren't suited for the job of course
14:38:56 Ge0rG isn't that pretty awkward to candidate for a position you think you are not well-suited for?
14:39:12 daniel That's the trump way
14:39:34 Ge0rG that's a candidacy everyone else thinks you are not well-suited for.
14:39:40 Ge0rG Okay, might be me for Council as well
14:41:54 efrit has joined
14:42:43 dwd Ge0rG, We have had people stand before specifically to make an election contested.
14:43:16 Ge0rG dwd: wow. That's pretty crazy
14:43:19 dwd Ge0rG, Presumably they felt they could do the job if selected, but I could see they might vote against themselves.
14:43:51 dwd Or might have voted. It was some time ago.
14:45:15 daniel has left
14:48:13 daniel has left
14:48:52 Kev has left
14:49:23 intosi has left
14:50:28 intosi has joined
14:51:07 moparisthebest has joined
14:53:04 Zash has left
14:59:22 daniel has left
15:00:51 la|r|ma has left
15:00:58 la|r|ma has joined
15:03:49 intosi has left
15:04:04 intosi has joined
15:17:26 efrit has left
15:17:28 lumi has left
15:20:48 uc has left
15:42:05 mathieui if I understand correctly I have a flamewar to catchup
15:44:20 moparisthebest I tried to revive this page if anyone is interested https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Tech_pages/XEP-0368
15:50:45 sonny has left
15:50:49 sonny has joined
15:55:58 Syndace has joined
15:57:00 nyco has left
15:57:08 nyco has joined
16:01:25 jcbrand has left
16:10:54 zinid has left
16:12:01 Kev has left
16:12:42 jubalh has left
16:18:40 tux has joined
16:18:58 Guus has left
16:21:46 ralphm has left
16:21:54 zinid has left
16:22:40 jubalh has left
16:27:45 waqas has left
16:30:11 daniel has left
16:37:47 Valerian has left
16:40:17 nyco found this paper, has it been discussed already? https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/666.pdf
16:41:33 Tobias has joined
16:45:39 waqas has joined
16:45:40 waqas has left
16:46:32 jubalh has joined
16:46:51 Guus has left
17:03:58 jjrh has left
17:05:04 SamWhited RE Styling, the thing I haven't gotten feedback on so far is the type of styling itself. Does this encompase peoples needs as far as IM goes? (I know some people want a full formatting and layout engine, but that's out of scope)
17:05:39 SamWhited Or is it too much even? Eg. is there any point in having ~strikeout~ which I doubt anyone will ever use?
17:07:18 Zash has left
17:08:22 Zash has left
17:08:27 Zash has left
17:08:32 Zash has left
17:08:37 Zash has left
17:09:25 Zash has left
17:09:31 Zash has left
17:10:22 Zash has left
17:10:30 Zash has left
17:10:33 Zash has left
17:15:05 jjrh has left
17:15:35 jjrh has left
17:15:41 sonny has left
17:15:43 sonny has joined
17:16:47 jjrh has left
17:17:05 jjrh has left
17:19:58 Syndace has left
17:20:34 sonny has left
17:20:37 sonny has joined
17:30:10 Guus SamWhited: I
17:30:12 Guus oops
17:31:20 Guus I must admit I've not read it in detail, but as far as I'm concerned, a basic set (bold, underline, italic, with perhaps a couple of others) is more than enough for a boatload of usecases, therefor making it a practical XEP
17:31:56 Guus There's likely other use-cases, but there's no need for one XEP to rule them all, right?
17:32:55 Steve Kille has left
17:33:09 Steve Kille has left
17:33:19 Steve Kille has joined
17:34:00 jonasw SamWhited, under the assumption that proper layouting is not possible, I think the things you include there are sufficient.
17:34:26 Steve Kille has left
17:35:32 jjrh has left
17:35:42 jjrh has left
17:35:50 Valerian has joined
17:36:06 Guus has left
17:36:53 Steve Kille has left
17:41:46 Steve Kille has left
17:42:44 intosi has left
17:49:13 arc has left
17:49:33 Steve Kille has left
17:49:49 Steve Kille has left
17:49:54 arc has joined
17:54:34 Kev has left
17:58:24 SamWhited Guus: is underline a requirement for you? Having that makes more sense to me than strikeout, but I don't have it right now
17:58:29 arc has left
17:58:45 valo has joined
17:58:55 arc has joined
18:00:31 jonasw I don’t think that underline is a good idea in general.
18:00:49 SamWhited yah, I'm not sure how useful that one is either; just slightly more useful than centerline
18:00:54 SamWhited (maybe)
18:01:03 jonasw I’d say the opposite.
18:01:10 jonasw we already have two ways to emphasise things in that protoxep
18:01:33 SamWhited That's fair too, semantically they're probably the same
18:01:40 SamWhited Now I'm even less sure :)
18:02:10 arc has left
18:02:57 arc has joined
18:05:38 sonny has left
18:05:42 sonny has joined
18:08:15 sonny has left
18:08:18 sonny has joined
18:08:22 sonny has joined
18:08:25 sonny has joined
18:08:31 sonny has joined
18:08:33 sonny has joined
18:08:41 sonny has joined
18:08:44 sonny has joined
18:10:29 valo has joined
18:10:46 arc has left
18:10:56 arc has joined
18:15:10 lumi has joined
18:15:17 arc has left
18:19:11 lovetox has left
18:19:34 lovetox has joined
18:22:21 moparisthebest I think _underline_ is supported in gajim though
18:22:26 moparisthebest yep, that underlined it
18:22:37 jonasw that some client supports it doesn’t make it a good thing
18:22:45 moparisthebest why not, specify what's already implemented most places, make them all optional, done
18:23:03 Zash you keep repeating "most places/clients"
18:23:06 jonasw > We are not typing on typewriters any more. We are using computers. Word processors, HTML, CSS. Underlining means a hyperlink. Period. If you want to emphasize something, use bold, italics, indents, all caps, or any combination thereof.
18:23:14 edhelas has left
18:23:23 jonasw https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/4680 kinda funny
18:23:53 Guus SamWhited: underline is not a requirement for me, but it's somewhat of a default featureset, right?
18:24:11 Guus but, to be honest, I don't care to much. My point was: keeping it simple is good.
18:24:14 jonasw I don’t think you can do that anymore in e.g. Markown or rST
18:24:18 SamWhited Guus: I'm not sure; Slack and Whatsapp don't support it.
18:24:27 SamWhited And I think they count as "most things" more than Gajim does.
18:24:51 SamWhited I'll leave it off for now for the sake of simplicity; we can add something later if it's a problem.
18:24:57 edhelas has joined
18:25:19 SamWhited Might take strikeout out too
18:27:12 Steve Kille has left
18:28:18 arc has joined
18:28:51 moparisthebest SamWhited, what about disco
18:29:29 Guus SamWhited: as I said: I'm not bothered by the exact set. I'm just gratefull you're keeping it short/simplish.
18:31:16 arc has left
18:31:19 arc has joined
18:33:19 arc has left
18:33:20 arc has joined
18:34:05 SamWhited moparisthebest: oh yah, I saw that discussion. I'm fine with removing it.
18:34:08 SamWhited Doesn't matter to me either way
18:34:28 SamWhited I was going to wait to see if it was accepted or not before pushing more changes
18:35:39 Guus has left
18:36:04 arc has left
18:36:05 arc has joined
18:37:27 arc has left
18:37:28 arc has joined
18:38:27 arc has left
18:38:29 arc has joined
18:39:17 tux has left
18:41:49 arc has left
18:41:50 arc has joined
18:44:00 arc has left
18:44:01 arc has joined
18:46:07 ralphm has joined
18:51:39 daniel > Might take strikeout out too I think the ~ character is rare enough that it won't cause trouble and slack and whatsapp are doing it. So in the interest of making transports work I'd just leave it in.
18:53:04 daniel has left
18:54:09 Zash Let me tell you about my ~/stuff
18:54:36 moparisthebest that's fine you didn't put it twice
18:54:44 moparisthebest wait is ~/stuff/~ a valid path?
18:54:47 daniel Zash: that's lacking the closing keyword though
18:54:49 moparisthebest I don't think I want to know...
18:54:53 jonasw moparisthebest, it is
18:55:19 Flow why shouldn't it be a valid path?
18:55:34 Valerian has left
18:55:43 moparisthebest dangerous to delete :)
18:56:36 Guus has left
18:57:07 intosi has joined
18:57:49 Flow jonasw, just upvoted https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/4680, nobody needs underline if you don't write on a board or on a paper
18:58:01 jonasw Guus, could you cancel the second-newest build please? https://hub.docker.com/r/xmppxsf/xeps/builds/
18:59:59 jonasw I may be stupid, but (re styling): > Matches MUST NOT extend over newlines and MUST start with a whitespace character or be the beginning of the line or the byte stream. how does that match with the example "*emphasized*foo*emphasized*" where "foo" is not emphasized?
19:01:09 daniel has left
19:02:28 daniel has left
19:03:01 Guus cancelled
19:03:01 arc has left
19:03:21 jonasw Guus, thanks -- even though I don’t see it in the UI yet.
19:03:26 SamWhited good eye, that's broken
19:03:48 SamWhited I have those rules tweaked a bit based on feedback locally anyways
19:04:17 daniel has left
19:05:08 jonasw SamWhited, re standards@: > A 100% solution with no false positives would be great, but I > can't think of a way to do it without significantly more complexity or a > formal markup language (which is against the requirements I drew up > based on previous discussions). what’s wrong with a formal markup language if we’re gonna need a parser which can handle context-free grammars anyways?
19:05:29 daniel I'd love to know what matrix is doing and eventually try to convince them to use the same syntax (to make transports) but matrix is impossible to Google
19:06:01 Guus (now I _really_ cancelled it)
19:06:03 SamWhited jonasw: duplicate content, even more complexity, etc.
19:06:09 arc has joined
19:06:23 jonasw IIRC from my compiler construction lectures you need an LR parser for a CFG which is already quite a complex beast.
19:06:32 SamWhited It's really not
19:06:41 SamWhited I don't think you need an LR parser here though
19:07:18 jonasw would have to take a deeper look. In any case, writing down the grammar formally is probably a good idea
19:07:40 SamWhited I think we're over thinking this. I've got an implementation which I'll push somewhere soon and it's relatively straight forward.
19:07:59 SamWhited I'm not even bothering to build an AST (though doing that would make things much faster)
19:08:01 jonasw Guus, yay :-)
19:08:57 Zash What's that, just s/\*.*\*/<b>&</b>/ and stick it in innerHTML?
19:09:02 Zash Good idea
19:09:40 jonasw Zash, you forgot the \b before the \*, they must be on word boundaries (essentially)
19:09:57 SamWhited Actually, if I remove escaping and strike out it may be possible to make a few minor tweaks and make this regular
19:10:02 SamWhited That would simplify things a lot
19:10:04 Kev has joined
19:10:21 jonasw hm, doesn’t the precedence of block over monospace over other inline already make this non-regular?
19:10:47 SamWhited ah yah, you're right, having block level things probably still make that impossible
19:16:04 Valerian has joined
19:34:52 goffi has left
19:46:11 Alex has left
19:51:04 Ge0rG Just for reference. The last time I tried to escape on slack, I have given up after three futile correction attempts.
19:51:30 SamWhited That's probably a good reason to remove the escape chars
19:52:12 Ge0rG Maybe there are no escape chars on slack, and this is why I failed. We'll never know.
19:53:21 SamWhited I did look at their docs and I don't remember any mention of a way to escape formatting chars
19:53:47 Guus At this point, let's publish something and start experimenting with implementations
19:53:50 Ge0rG Yeah. You can't escape slack
19:54:34 SamWhited Guus: There are at least two implementations already :) (Daniel and I both have one)
19:55:41 Guus awesome. This is in Conversations
19:55:42 Guus /
19:55:43 Guus ?
19:56:13 Guus Foo *bar*
19:56:15 SamWhited Guus: https://github.com/siacs/Conversations/tree/styling
19:56:27 Guus has left
19:56:29 SamWhited It's just an experimental branch
19:56:33 Guus ah ok :)
19:56:45 SamWhited I don't think it's complete either. I also have one in library form that I will push somewhere "soon"
19:56:49 Alex has joined
19:59:03 Guus Cool. Let's start gaining experience with this, and discuss it from there.
20:01:31 daniel Guus, SamWhited: the current beta has this.
20:03:56 Ge0rG I'm sure it will freak out admins, developers and mathematicians
20:05:08 Guus let's see if I can hack this in Spark real quick
20:13:08 arc has left
20:13:09 arc has joined
20:13:18 intosi has left
20:15:19 Guus has left
20:16:13 Guus test _foo_ *bar* ~foobar~
20:17:16 Guus why's ~this~ bold and strikethrough?
20:17:35 Guus ah, doesn't reset
20:17:58 Valerian has left
20:20:56 Guus has left
20:21:49 Guus has left
20:23:09 Guus okay. Split by whitespace, checking first and last character only - Not what's in the xep, but it'll give me some feelign on how this looks
20:23:15 Guus so far, I'm not unhappy.
20:23:44 Kev I've not looked at the protoXEP yet, been busy. Is it basically *bold* /italics/ _underline_ ?
20:23:53 lskdjf has left
20:23:57 SamWhited *bold*, _italics_, and ~strikethrough~
20:24:10 SamWhited (although I was thinking of removing ~strikethrough~)
20:24:14 Kev Can we have /italics/ and _underline_ please? :)
20:24:32 Kev If we do that, I have an implementation that predates the protoXEP by about 15 years.
20:24:57 SamWhited /italics/ seems nice but also likely to conflict with paths and URLs, Slack and Whatsapp both do _italics_ so I felt it was best to immitate what they were doing, but I coudl be convinced otherwise
20:25:12 Kev Slack and Whatsapp both annoy me for getting this wrong :)
20:25:22 SamWhited I'd rather follow convention unless there's a compelling reason not to
20:25:32 SamWhited (but I do agree that I think those make more sense)
20:25:35 Kev See above - I've got about 15 years of convention for you :D
20:25:35 Guus has left
20:25:40 Kev But it depends what you want.
20:25:52 Tobias but silicon valley knows better
20:25:53 Kev If what you want is an input format, it doesn't matter much.
20:26:07 Kev If what you want is something that falls back to plain text gracefully, then /italic/ and _underline_ are better.
20:26:32 dwd Kev, Gajim also does *bold* /italics/ and _underline_, but no ~strikethrough~.
20:26:50 Guus /italics/ is sooo 1997
20:27:03 Guus I've not seen that since.
20:27:09 dwd Guus, Yes, and your point?
20:27:19 Guus who said I had a point?
20:27:22 SamWhited I'm not sure that they are better though, regardless of how nice they look people are used to Slack and Whatsapp I think. Then again, I'm not sure it really matters all that much either way.
20:28:05 Kev SamWhited: Except Slack never renders this.
20:28:12 Guus has left
20:28:16 Kev If you send *something* in Slack, you only ever see the bold, not the surrounding *
20:28:27 Kev So people aren't used to seeing _somethingitalic_
20:28:41 SamWhited Oh yah, it's a tiny bit different, but as far as the characters that people type goes they're used to writing _italic_
20:28:48 Guus (I like how this is rendering for me now :P )
20:29:14 SamWhited I assume… I haven't used Slack except very briefly, I just read their docs.
20:29:44 Zash ~~You beat~~ ✎
20:29:45 Kev I'm used to writing /this/ in Slack and wondering why they don't support italics.
20:30:13 Zash You mean <i>hello</i>path/ is what you see in places ✏
20:30:30 Kev This is not a hill for me to die on, but if we've got a 15 year old convention in existing clients, it seems weird to break that.
20:30:46 SamWhited yah, I would say this is entirely bike sheddy, except that I do think the /path/to/foo is potentially an actual problem
20:30:57 SamWhited What clients do this convention?
20:31:00 SamWhited Gajim? Any others?
20:31:00 dwd Kev, I have to admit that although /italics/ is far more natural to me, I never use it (or _underline_ either).
20:31:03 Kev I put it in Psi about 15 years ago.
20:31:20 moparisthebest it's not a problem if you leave all the characters always though SamWhited
20:31:35 SamWhited That's also fair
20:31:51 jubalh has joined
20:32:15 SamWhited I'm not saying that this should necessarily be a trendy popularity contest, but I suspect more people use Whatsapp and Slack than Psi and Gajim, so if it's just a matter of "people are used to this, it's a convention" then I'd still want to stick with what's in the protoxep now.
20:32:34 jonasw people are used to the input convention, not to the wire format (they don’t care about it, but we should)
20:33:20 jonasw finally the build finished: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/markup.html
20:34:24 SamWhited jonasw: what is the number in span start/end?
20:34:37 jonasw it’s explained.
20:34:42 jonasw (codepoint in XML character data)
20:34:51 dwd jonasw, Read that already when I noticed the github notification. I'm undecided on that approach. I do think some of the failure cases with overlapping spans and blocks and so on are going to be weird.
20:34:58 SamWhited ah sorry, I was just looking for that earlier and didn't see it
20:35:18 SamWhited What happens if I put it in the middle of a grapheme cluster composed of multiple code points?
20:35:27 jonasw SamWhited, it gets split when rendering.
20:35:31 jonasw I presume
20:35:34 dwd SamWhited, We've used a similar approach in <references/>, BTW.
20:35:35 SamWhited *nods*
20:35:39 jonasw depends on your rendering engine I think
20:35:43 SamWhited I wondered about it in references too actually
20:36:04 jonasw I was already wondering whether that is something which can be used as an exploit, but aside from splitting emojis and possibly cutting of accents from letters I don’t see how this could be abused
20:36:10 jonasw but then again, unicode is weird.
20:36:37 vanitasvitae jonasw: looks nice
20:37:01 Guus good job on formulating an alternative, jonasw
20:37:39 vanitasvitae jonasw: the introduction seems weird. I'm missing a "this approach thrives to solve the mentioned issues in the following way: ..."
20:37:46 Guus on first glance, I'm inclined to prefer the less complex version, but I love to see a documented alternative
20:37:49 jonasw vanitasvitae, I always forget that :)
20:38:20 daniel has left
20:38:27 SamWhited minor nit: if you're sending an encrypted body this leaks information about the body. Probably not in any significant way, but it seems worth mentioning in the security considerations or somewhere.
20:38:31 jonasw Guus, I like the simplicity of the *input format* Sam suggests. I don’t like having it as the wire foramt.
20:38:56 Valerian has joined
20:39:07 Guus jonasw, understood
20:39:07 goffi has joined
20:39:19 Guus (also, should that have been bold?)
20:39:33 jonasw no, my client can only into XHTML-IM and I’m too lazy to do that
20:39:46 Ge0rG SamWhited: I think the biggest design failure of omemo is to only encrypt the body...
20:40:05 daniel > minor nit: if you're sending an encrypted body this leaks information about the body. Probably not in any significant way, but it seems worth mentioning in the security considerations or somewhere. This is a problem with all the references and annotations XEPs
20:40:05 jonasw SamWhited, good point. Admittedly, I was in a bit of a hurry because I only thought of this last night and I felt it’d be good to have the idea out before next council meeting.
20:40:29 daniel But as Ge0rG said this is rather a problem with omemo than with those xeps
20:40:38 Kev daniel: I think the reverse is actually true.
20:40:50 Kev This is a problem with any encryption scheme that only encrypts the body.
20:41:09 Kev Ah, which you then said :)
20:41:09 jonasw isn’t that what daniel said?
20:41:10 SamWhited As I've previously expressed, I think it only makes sense for OMEMO (or anything really) to encrypt text nodes, not actual XML (now you've got a weird mixed-mode stream and that's going to lead to worse security issues later)
20:41:11 jonasw right
20:41:20 Ge0rG We need to encrypt the meta data finally. That's what the services are after!
20:41:22 Kev My hotel wifi here is *not* fast.
20:41:25 SamWhited So even if it encrypted more than the body, I don't think it could encrypt this.
20:41:30 arc has left
20:41:31 arc has joined
20:41:37 SamWhited But that's a discussion for another time.
20:41:54 Guus I'm off. goodnight everyone.
20:41:57 Kev Night.
20:42:00 SamWhited o/
20:42:14 jonasw nighty Guus
20:43:18 daniel > As I've previously expressed, I think it only makes sense for OMEMO (or anything really) to encrypt text nodes, not actual XML (now you've got a weird mixed-mode stream and that's going to lead to worse security issues later) It's a quite complicated problem. That's probably why nobody has solved it yet
20:43:28 Ge0rG Mixing data and meta data is known to fail security since Captain Crunch. We should have learned from that by now.
20:44:20 goffi jonasw: fantastic proposal, I really love it, thanks a lot for that !
20:44:32 Arc has joined
20:44:42 jonasw goffi, you’re welcome
20:45:14 SamWhited jonasw: we've already discussed this a little bit I think, but what do you see as the benefits of doing it this way?
20:45:28 moparisthebest it would be quite neat to do hop-based encryption, like encrypt entire thing so your server knows to send it to otherserver.net but not who@otherserver.net, and that server can see who to send it to but not who it came from or whatever
20:45:36 jonasw SamWhited, I’m going to head to bed in a few minutes, so I don’t think we can discuss this at length now.
20:45:47 moparisthebest that's getting more onion-routing-y though and is starting to sound like a protocol not-xmpp
20:45:54 SamWhited sounds good
20:45:56 Ge0rG moparisthebest: that fails for presence
20:46:35 Ge0rG moparisthebest: there are protocols not xmpp that do it, like tox
20:46:52 moparisthebest well tox is p2p without any hops right?
20:47:00 moparisthebest no servers anyway, I think
20:47:17 jonasw SamWhited, it provides the protocol break we need to make rich text safer (compared to XHTML-IM) and provides the formality which is needed to make it future-proofer (compared to ad-hoc text formats).
20:47:21 Zash moparisthebest: p2p in the real world has servers, only they call them super nodes or something
20:47:28 jonasw SamWhited, I think that we shouldn’t be mixing input conventions with wire-level markup.
20:47:35 SamWhited jonasw: why not?
20:47:44 jonasw this is somewhere between a matter of design principle and concern about interoperability.
20:48:07 jonasw because input conventions only matter for humans, and may differ between different user interfaces
20:48:13 SamWhited I don't see why interoperability would be better or worse with an XML based wire format vs. a plain-text-with-magic-characters based wire format
20:48:17 moparisthebest I'm saying like xmpp setup is like A (client) -> B (server) -> C (server) -> D(client)
20:48:46 moparisthebest B only needs to know it's coming from A and going to C, not about D, C only needs to know it's coming from B and going to D, not about A
20:49:01 SamWhited I'm actually worried that making it more extensible and "future proof" as you put it will be a bad thing here. It's not necessary and I suspect will just lead to feature bloat in the long run
20:49:07 jonasw SamWhited, when you start to define new meta-characters or obsolete existing ones, the messages are interpreted differently.
20:49:10 andrey.g has left
20:49:10 moparisthebest and any content besides those specific routing instructions can be encrypted e2e so only A and D can see them
20:49:15 SamWhited jonasw: that doesn't bother me at all
20:49:23 jonasw SamWhited, I know.
20:49:26 jonasw that’s what worries me.
20:49:27 SamWhited that's already what happens when I add a new smiley or something, and it's a minor anoyance at worst
20:49:52 Ge0rG It's a consistent annoyance.
20:50:03 SamWhited True, but still a minor one.
20:50:03 jonasw I don’t see why we have to buy that minor annoyance which is simply going to happen (I don’t approve of messengers which replace text with emoticons either, by the way) if there are alternatives.
20:50:11 daniel fwiw i do see the benefit of jonasw approach. but i don't see me implementing this anytime soon due to the omemo problem
20:50:25 SamWhited If there were good alternatives I'd agree, but I think the trade offs on the alternatives are worse.
20:50:35 SamWhited And if it weren't such a minor problem that doesn't affect most people
20:50:35 Ge0rG daniel: fix omemo then...
20:50:38 jonasw SamWhited, let’s turn this around, what’s your problem with my approach?
20:51:10 daniel Ge0rG, i do make some money with Conversations. but unfortunatly not enough to go down *that* rabbit hole
20:51:16 SamWhited jonasw: It's a lot more complexity. How does it interact with message editing, for example?
20:51:25 SamWhited How does it interact with OMEMO, OTR, etc? Does it leak information?
20:51:26 jonasw SamWhited, do you mean message correction?
20:51:29 SamWhited yah, that one
20:51:46 jonasw message correction is clear on that one: the new <message/> replaces the old
20:51:50 jonasw so you’d include the markup again.
20:51:57 Ge0rG SamWhited: the corrected message needs to have its own markup xml
20:52:15 SamWhited ah yah, that one actually makes sense I suppose
20:53:01 jonasw SamWhited, interaction with OMEMO and OTR etc. is at least better than with XHTML-IM (instead of leaking the full plaintext (hi pidgin!) or having no markup at all, you can leak only the markup or have no markup at all. that’s a step forward or so...)
20:53:03 daniel Ge0rG, also my last attempts in starting a discussion on stanza content encryption didn't go anywhere
20:53:07 Ge0rG SamWhited: also you can just strip the markup and still have human readable body
20:53:32 SamWhited Ge0rG: You can do that in either case
20:53:33 Ge0rG And screen reader readable
20:53:37 moparisthebest or, with SamWhited 's approach, you can do nothing and still have a human readable body
20:53:39 Ge0rG And no false positives
20:54:10 Ge0rG moparisthebest: for a limited subset of "human readable"
20:54:16 jonasw daniel, can you point me to it? I can’t find it in my local archives.
20:54:29 jonasw (a subject line or keyword to search for will do)
20:54:57 moparisthebest works for everything else so
20:55:35 SamWhited Anyways, I'm not saying that this is bad, just more complex and I don't see any significant benefit that's not outweighed by the disadvantages.
20:56:29 moparisthebest I might have just missed it but is > 1 index/character with respect to start/end or 4 ?
20:56:37 jonasw moparisthebest, 1.
20:56:43 jonasw "XML character data" => entities are already decoded
20:56:49 jonasw sane XML parsers won’t hand you entities anyways
20:56:55 Ge0rG But it seems that different users apply different weights to different disadvantages
20:57:11 moparisthebest I saw XML character data, I didn't know what that meant though
20:57:29 jonasw moparisthebest, in short, that what your XML library hands you when you ask for an elements text.
20:57:36 moparisthebest the main disadvantage is all clients have to implement this or any formatting is lost
20:57:46 moparisthebest wheras if I say something *really* important
20:57:50 moparisthebest you get it regardless
20:58:01 daniel jonasw, mail is in the 'omemo discussion summary 2017' thread and my particular mail is from june 22nd
20:58:04 jonasw moparisthebest, that’s the better case I think
20:58:19 jonasw moparisthebest, with Message Styling, all *sending* clients have to implement it or their message may be incorrectly and unexpectedly formatted
20:58:42 edhelas has joined
20:58:43 moparisthebest no, sending clients don't have to implement it at all
20:58:46 nyco has joined
20:58:51 jonasw if we’re going to have incompatibilities between markup interpretation, I prefer them to be vanishing markup instead of markup which apperas out of nothing
20:58:56 moparisthebest no one is using a WYSIWYG editor to bold something
20:59:01 moparisthebest they are just typing *bold*
20:59:09 jonasw moparisthebest, they do, if they don’t want their line which starts with "> " to be interpreted as blockquote.
20:59:32 jonasw moparisthebest, you’re assuming that all clients are operated by humans.
20:59:34 moparisthebest I feel like a broken record here, but again, everything has been doing it since way before xmpp
20:59:40 moparisthebest so people are used to it, and it's fine
20:59:50 jonasw anyways
20:59:52 jonasw as promised, heading to bed
20:59:53 moparisthebest email for example, IRC for another
21:00:00 Ge0rG moparisthebest: and the sending client can convert that to bold in the input line and send well defined wire format. Or you can press undo and send ** instead
21:00:19 SamWhited Yah, it seems like it's been firmly in the "good enough" category for many, many years.
21:00:22 moparisthebest hmm then I have to care though
21:00:31 daniel i can see myself adding jonasw markup to outgoing unencrypted messages on top of SamWhited's styling
21:00:36 daniel it doesn't hurt
21:00:46 Arc Tobias: IRT xep0385, I have an objection to table 2. First and most notable, Opus is an IETF standard for audio and was left out entirely.
21:02:31 moparisthebest I do immensly prefer jonasw's solution as opposed to duplicating the text in a different element
21:02:47 SamWhited I agree with that
21:03:28 moparisthebest in fact, add all the xhtml-im features to that and publish
21:03:47 SamWhited I do not agree with that and see it as the most significant downside to the spec
21:04:02 moparisthebest it feels like a mandatory whitelist kind of
21:04:25 moparisthebest I suppose mr. evil could still include <script> directly in the body
21:04:37 moparisthebest but I guess that's always a danger for a dev dumb enough to .innerHTML it
21:08:04 jubalh has left
21:09:34 Ge0rG And then a client needs to put styling into the body, markup into a related xml and add xhtmlim
21:11:00 efrit has joined
21:11:33 moparisthebest I don't think so
21:13:07 jjrh has left
21:13:18 goffi has left
21:14:27 andrey.g has joined
21:15:25 Guus has left
21:15:26 andrey.g has joined
21:16:42 andrey.g has joined
21:17:13 pep. moparisthebest, what you type as your input doesn't have to be what the client sends verbatim. If you want to use markdown (or whatever else, poezio uses ^C<key>) as your input format, fine. But don't send that on the wire and let the receiving client decide on what/how to display it
21:17:44 andrey.g has joined
21:18:00 moparisthebest pep., I get it, and totally agree for complicated formats, but don't overcomplicate something simple that has existed since before xmpp
21:18:50 pep. How does that change anything to what I just said above. As a client I still want to decide what I display
21:18:50 andrey.g has joined
21:18:56 jjrh has left
21:19:42 moparisthebest pep., do you understand that I meant to emphasize *this* in my message though?
21:19:57 pep. "it's always been how we've done and it works fine". I don't have an example offhand but I'm sure this is not the best argument out there
21:19:58 moparisthebest or do you need some fancy wire protocol to understand that?
21:20:32 moparisthebest for the limited subset of markup in that one particular xep, it works perfectly fine
21:20:36 pep. Still, what if I don't want to understand it, what if I can't understand it
21:20:42 moparisthebest if you want to get more complicated, do so in some other way
21:20:47 pep. As it's been said on the list already
21:20:48 andrey.g has joined
21:20:53 moparisthebest then I guess tough?
21:21:08 moparisthebest at least you had a better chance than if you didn't get ** because your client didn't implement fancy-new-xep
21:21:09 pep. Nice for an eXtensible protocol
21:21:26 jjrh has left
21:22:04 andrey.g has joined
21:22:27 sezuan has joined
21:22:31 jjrh has left
21:22:58 Alex has left
21:23:01 andrey.g has joined
21:23:26 pep. SamWhited, Example 8, isn't the nested version missing a space?
21:23:37 Guus has left
21:23:41 Guus has joined
21:24:02 pep. ~~Or maybe the sentence above can be reforumlated a bit~~ ✎
21:24:11 SamWhited pep. no, I need to clarify that. If you parse the outer quote as a block, then parse the inner quote then it's the "start of the byte stream"
21:24:11 pep. Or maybe the sentence above can be reformulated a bit ✏
21:24:19 pep. k
21:24:36 SamWhited at least, that's how it ended up working in my little parser which recursively parses inside blocks, and it seems sane
21:25:08 SamWhited I was debating if I needed to be strict about specifying that though or if that's just going to confuse people. Overspecifying is sometimes as bad as underspecifying.
21:25:45 pep. But then some clients might render "> > " different from ">> "
21:26:17 daniel SamWhited: the XEP could probably use a few more complicated examples at some point. Like something people could copy past into their unit tests
21:26:37 SamWhited daniel: agreed. I started on a unit test suite as well which I'll push when I push out my implementation
21:26:45 daniel But we should nail down the syntax and test everything a little bit more before going through the troubles
21:26:54 SamWhited Indeed
21:29:33 SamWhited Conveniently, the commonmark parsing rules are basically the same (I mostly stole them), so you can test things (albeit with slightly different characters) using their tools more or less
21:29:35 SamWhited http://spec.commonmark.org/dingus/?text=no%20format%0A%0A%3E%20%60%60%60%0A%3E%20Preformatted%20text%20to%20the%20end%20of%0A%3E%20the%20block%20quote%0A%60%60%60ignored%20(not%20sure%20about%20adding%20this%20to%20the%20XEP%20or%20not)%0A%3E%20preformatted%20to%20the%20end%20of%20the%20body%20(not%20a%20block%20quote)
21:30:47 moparisthebest pep., point is people have typed like this since before xmpp, type like this now, and will type like this later, whether someone standardizes the rules or not
21:31:07 moparisthebest what exactly is the problem with it? not enough XML?
21:34:04 jubalh has joined
21:35:01 Zash has left
21:36:01 SamWhited I think I'm going to move the block/span stuff into implementation details and make that non-normative. If a few clients have incompatible edge cases it's no worse than today (where lots of clients effectively implement this slightly differently), then I can still provide guidance without overly limiting people. </thinking outloud>
21:36:05 pep. moparisthebest, you pollute the plaintext. As people have said already: it's not easily interoperable. Once you say italic is not // not __ anymore, what happens to __? people will still continue to display both because "tough luck"? (as you say) Not easily extensible. Adding more and more meta-characters removes choices from the selection of characters I can use to type text. Maybe for you it is "human readable", and for others in your own circles, but that's the extent of it. You are not taking into account other people, bots, you are not taking accessibility into account.
21:36:32 SamWhited "not easily extensible" is a feature.
21:37:00 pep. So you're fine cluttering client markups until the end of times
21:37:29 SamWhited yes, although I wouldn't phrase it that way
21:38:39 daniel has left
21:39:05 moparisthebest right you don't want it extendable at all
21:39:10 moparisthebest it's a de-facto standard anyway
21:39:14 pep. no it's not
21:39:22 pep. I was reading just above Kev uses // for italics
21:39:25 pep. You are using __
21:39:29 moparisthebest this happens and will happen regardless of if we standardize
21:39:55 pep. moparisthebest, no that's the point
21:39:56 moparisthebest yea, I don't think it matters, I also use /italics/
21:40:08 pep. if we standardize it shouldn't happen
21:40:11 moparisthebest gajim supports that by the way
21:40:11 pep. That's the whole point
21:40:13 SamWhited pep. I think he meant that most things are already using some kind of indicator in the text and people will keep doing that. Not the specific indicators
21:40:13 Guus has left
21:40:20 moparisthebest yes
21:40:53 moparisthebest I mean most people write like that anyway, regardless of any client support
21:41:07 moparisthebest and then also lots of xmpp and non-xmpp clients mark it up based on those
21:41:18 pep. SamWhited, agreed, people have been using that, and as I said above I wouldn't mind the client using it as input, but I really not keen on sending that on the wire
21:41:32 Guus has joined
21:41:44 moparisthebest that's fine for something that isn't already widely used I guess
21:41:52 SamWhited My IRC client, one of my XMPP clients, my email, and probably other things I'm forgetting already send that on the wire and it works pretty well.
21:42:14 moparisthebest and as you said slack and whatscrap
21:42:32 pep. No, it works for you and your circles, because they know
21:42:53 moparisthebest I thought whatscrap was for the mom's of the world
21:42:54 SamWhited It also works for every non-technical person who uses whatsapp that I know (and that's a lot more than the technical people in my XMPP circles)
21:42:55 pep. Slack people don't know, Mattermost people don't know
21:43:07 pep. They only have to click
21:44:12 pep. normal people don't use IRC so I think I can safely discard that one. Or they use some fancy client that handles that for them, still you rarely see non-technically people willingly use it, Same for email actually, it's not the same usage at all between technical and non-technical people
21:44:24 pep. Non-technical people often send html and there you have rich content
21:44:42 la|r|ma has left
21:44:44 pep. (and fancy colors, eww)
21:46:06 moparisthebest are you saying XMPP has more users than email and IRC ?
21:46:09 Ge0rG Non technical people don't use the markup characters in normal use, because they don't need to paste directory paths nor math formulas
21:46:13 moparisthebest because uh, seems wrong
21:46:58 pep. moparisthebest, not "more"
21:47:32 pep. Different kind of users I believe, or at least aiui that's a target for the XEP
21:47:40 Valerian has left
21:47:47 pep. Because Slack and Whatsapp are cited a number of times
21:48:41 moparisthebest what kind of users are you trying to target who's needs aren't met? I'm confused
21:48:56 moparisthebest because you mentioned IRC which is more technical and whatsapp which is the exact opposite
21:49:00 moparisthebest both implement this same thing
21:49:15 pep. No I'm just trying to extrapolate who you are thinking the XEP is targetting
21:49:23 pep. I didn't mention IRC, Sam did
21:49:28 moparisthebest everyone on the internet does this type of thing
21:49:37 moparisthebest ‎[04:48:57 PM] ‎pep.‎: normal people don't use IRC so I think I can safely discard that one.
21:49:45 pep. Yes, read a sentence above now
21:50:04 pep. SamWhited> My IRC client, one of my XMPP clients, my email, and probably other things I'm forgetting already send that on the wire and it works pretty well.
21:50:09 moparisthebest I've never heard of an IRC client with a WYSIWYG editor
21:50:25 moparisthebest they don't even have passwords without messaging a bot
21:50:42 pep. maybe you don't know about sasl, but that's how of the scope for tonight
21:51:05 Valerian has joined
21:51:09 moparisthebest that's a super recent extension not everything implements though :)
21:51:19 moparisthebest and server-side, it still gets passed through to the nickserv bot
21:51:28 daniel has left
21:51:31 SamWhited This went really off the rails in the time it took me to discuss something at work and then come back :)
21:51:44 SamWhited I'll be interested to read the backlog and see how it got to SASL
21:51:47 moparisthebest bottom line is if it's good enough for email, IRC, and whatsapp, then it's fair to say it's good enough for xmpp
21:52:00 pep. SamWhited, same here :/
21:52:00 moparisthebest because that covers the gamut of *all* internet users
21:52:03 Kev SamWhited: No, it wouldn't.
21:52:16 Kev No, you won't, rather.
21:52:33 moparisthebest I'd love to hear about the internet user that doesn't use email or whatsapp
21:52:33 Kev You might think you will, but it'll be a big disappointment when you get there.
21:52:39 jjrh has left
21:52:39 pep. Kev, :)
21:52:50 SamWhited drat
21:53:05 Guus has left
21:53:33 Kev OTOH, I just found a presence leak in 6121, so that's nice.
21:53:42 SamWhited oh fun
21:54:29 Guus has joined
21:54:40 andrey.g has joined
21:54:40 Kev Actually, it's not a presence leak, just an inconsistency. Drat.
21:55:25 daniel has left
21:55:38 andrey.g has joined
21:56:17 daniel has left
21:56:45 pep. SamWhited, otherwise, if you have time to answer my direct reply to your comments that'd be nice
21:56:45 jjrh has left
21:56:54 lovetox i could live with both approaches, if Sams approach is *really* simple, so nothing fancy like lists and stuff, keep it simple and readable even if a client doesnt support it
21:56:58 SamWhited pep. direct reply?
21:57:01 andrey.g has joined
21:57:15 pep. like the small block of text before moparisthebest barged in
21:57:27 moparisthebest hey I've been here the whole time :P
21:57:43 moparisthebest oops :P was sent as text and rendered as a smiley, need a xep and new wire format
21:57:52 jjrh has left
21:58:02 SamWhited pep. I don't see it
21:58:15 lovetox jonasw, approach i like because i dont need to write parsers for that, seems simple and its more of a replacement for xhtml
21:58:34 daniel has left
21:58:46 pep. SamWhited, https://bpaste.net/raw/14760ce8f04d
21:59:03 Kev has left
21:59:25 moparisthebest lovetox, completely agree there
21:59:34 SamWhited Please hold, asking a friend who knows nothing about computers "How do you make text bold in Whatsapp?" to see what they say
22:00:26 daniel has left
22:01:07 pep. ~~SamWhited, yeah, one example won't discard all of this. I do agree I don't have statistics on this, but neither do you~~ ✎
22:01:22 pep. SamWhited, yeah, one example won't discard all of this. I do admit I don't have statistics on this, but neither do you ✏
22:01:27 marc has left
22:01:58 lovetox Sams approach also seems like a: Many clients do this anyway so lets make a XEP out of it
22:02:28 moparisthebest yea, why not?
22:02:29 daniel has left
22:03:02 Guus has left
22:03:03 andrey.g has joined
22:03:03 edhelas because sometime it's not because a lot of persons are doing something that it's good ?
22:03:30 daniel has left
22:04:21 lovetox i dont really feel that this needs a xep, a client can show this that way and have a config option to turn it off like gajim has for proably a decade
22:04:27 Guus has joined
22:05:05 SamWhited lovetox: I more or less agree with you, but I was told that we can't deprecate XHTML-IM until there's an alternative (and maybe if nothing else this will introduce a little consistency or broaden support for simple formatting)
22:05:37 jjrh has left
22:06:09 SamWhited pep. in that case if you're allowed to argue with no data and I'm not allowed to at least ask around, I'm not sure how you want me to respond to that. I don't think it's a problem, people use whatsapp, it does this. I don't think it has a bold button on Android (unless they've added one), and people still send bold text.
22:06:48 daniel has left
22:07:03 SamWhited The people who really, really won't understand this aren't likely to use it, so no harm done. Unless you can demonstrate somewhere with a high rate of false positives where it would cause confusion?
22:07:12 daniel has left
22:07:22 SamWhited Or, alternatively, people who really won't understand this can use a client with a bold button.
22:08:13 pep. re: no data, fair enough.
22:08:49 pep. Then I don't understand why you absolutely want to pass this on the wire
22:08:53 lovetox i dont feel strong as other people about your approach because i simply think it will change nothing
22:09:05 lovetox clients use this formatting already, and will conitnue
22:09:11 daniel has left
22:09:40 SamWhited pep. because it's less complicated than adding an entirely new wire format, does what clients already do and what (I suspect, with limited data as you pointed out) people are already used to
22:10:01 SamWhited It also follows a convention that's been in use for a long time across multiple types of media
22:10:45 daniel has left
22:13:39 lovetox i think people will likely accept it more if its a : lets write down the status quo
22:13:40 daniel has left
22:13:55 lovetox but if you mean, lets extend it later and add all kinds of stuff
22:14:07 lovetox then i think jonas approach is better
22:14:32 SamWhited I specifically want it to *not* be extended later with all kinds of stuff.
22:14:36 daniel has left
22:14:39 pep. SamWhited, why?
22:14:53 jere has joined
22:15:10 SamWhited pep. because that's the trap we always fall into: make everything as complicated and as extensible as possible. This leads to incompatibilities between clients, makes things harder to implement, etc.
22:15:25 andrey.g has joined
22:15:34 lovetox pep. because you get more and more styling elements into the plaintext
22:15:40 SamWhited I want styleing, not layout
22:15:56 SamWhited *styling, even
22:16:19 pep. SamWhited, I am not willing to sacrifice <body> over a "I don't want to complicate things", I don't think that's something we can come back from
22:16:38 SamWhited pep. it's already something people are doing, you're not changing or sacrificing anything.
22:16:56 SamWhited It works today, it's simple, people are used to it. That's "good enough" as far as I'm concerned.
22:17:52 daniel has left
22:20:37 Guus has left
22:24:09 Valerian has left
22:25:45 Guus has joined
22:27:02 edhelas jonasw interesting approach :)
22:28:19 pep. I definitely prefer it to Styling as well. I find the whole thing futile in the first place, but I understand the security concerns and I think jonasw's proposal covers it
22:32:59 Arc SamWhited: I think jonasw's approach is overcomplicated, however, it has some interesting side effects.
22:33:00 bjc has left
22:33:02 nyco has left
22:33:26 Arc im trying to remember it, but there was a XEP published about a year ago (?) that allowed you to updated a previous message
22:33:35 nyco has joined
22:34:09 SamWhited Arc: we briefly discussed the message replacing one, you'd have to fully replace the message and the new one would have to have its own offsets
22:34:21 daniel has left
22:34:25 SamWhited Unless this was something different?
22:34:40 Arc what if it only updated the markup, or added to it.
22:35:01 Arc something like this would have to survive numerous tests, such as whiteboarding
22:36:02 bjc has joined
22:36:25 Arc yours is obviously simpler, and I agree that its a good thing.
22:37:06 Arc frankly i think this whole issue is a bikeshed that's only going to rage on until everyone's exhausted and the issue is dropped again
22:37:18 daniel has left
22:37:43 Arc im sitting next to our UX guy and he's hard eyerolling at the whole issue
22:38:14 pep. I think that's just a waste of time and we have other more interesting things to tackle
22:38:42 Arc i think tackling xhtml-IM is important. but yes there's so many other issues.
22:39:02 Arc the construction workers still need their bikeshed.
22:39:12 SamWhited Yah, really this whole thing only exists because for some reason people think we can't deprecate XHTML-IM until there's something else vaguely similar
22:39:24 moparisthebest has joined
22:39:39 Arc i like that inline images are no longer included in either proposal.
22:39:45 pep. SamWhited, I think deprecating XHTML-IM is not the answer in the first place and that's what started this whole holy war.
22:40:48 Arc pep.: there's strong feelings on either side of it. but the core point remains, until someone has solved the core issue with xhtml-im it is *not* worth user security for the rarely used features it offers
22:41:35 Arc xhtml-im has had a decade of real world use, and the security issues are yet to be solved. most don't even try. that's the issue.
22:41:57 SamWhited Indeed :(
22:42:18 pep. Well if they don't even try they're not going to try much more with other implementations. But I've already been told to shut up for whatever reasons
22:42:56 SamWhited pep. that's why we need specs that just don't have the same fundamental flaws, so that people who just don't try (or who do try but make a mistake) are less likely to shoot themselves in the foot
22:43:26 Arc or in this case, shoot all their users in the foot.
22:43:38 pep. Then I guess XHTML-IM is not the only XEP you should tackle, I hope you have time for the rest of every single XEP that tries to display something to the user
22:43:43 Arc we're getting slaughtered on the UX front.
22:43:58 daniel By the way. Conversations now supports code blocks as well. The next stable release will probably be tomorrow or the day after. And then we will get some real world feedback on the styling thing
22:44:27 pep. And more cluttury interface :( I already hate the blockquote thing
22:44:35 pep. When I don't explicitely ask for it
22:44:43 Arc pep.: i agree there are many. and I think there's a large interest in addressing them, xhtml-im is just a low hanging fruit with massive security issues
22:45:29 pep. I think jonasw's proposal answers the security concerns fairly well though
22:45:54 pep. It may still be improved, but that's a step forward
22:45:56 SamWhited pep. yes, both address the concerns with XHTML-IM as far as I can see.
22:46:19 Arc I don't dislike his proposal. I see merits in it. We're not going to resolve it today, there'll be some time to consider and discuss.
22:46:33 SamWhited daniel: nice, that was quick. I still haven't built the branch so maybe I'll just wait now
22:46:40 jubalh has joined
22:47:08 pep. Arc, as you said earlier, I only see this resolve itself when everybody gets tired of it and one of the sides gives way
22:47:17 pep. (or maybe it wasn't exactly what you meant)
22:48:02 Arc there's a number of young XEPs now that deal with ranges demarking substrings within message bodies
22:48:11 sonny has joined
22:48:41 Arc pep.: not exactly. you and I? we're not client authors.
22:49:22 Arc daniel is. he and others have the final say, regardless of whatever is published in the XEP. ideally the XEP that gets promoted reflects the consensus that evolves out of this discussion.
22:49:30 pep. I liked goffi's point btw, against the "You can have the plaintext version differ from the rich content if you include both".
22:49:52 pep. Arc, well he gets the final say for his client
22:50:14 pep. And his client only. That will probably influence other clients though, or the war might continue to rage, I don't know
22:50:28 Arc pep.: do you author a client?
22:50:35 pep. In the process of
22:50:45 Arc oh neat, what platform is it for
22:51:22 Arc everything we're working on is web-based, tho i have next to no involvement with the frontend.
22:52:26 pep. We're still a bit far to say that, I guess it'll run on whatever the authors use primarily. The code is in Rust, I'm not sure about the frontends yet, we're sorting the xmpp stuff out first
22:53:06 Arc great to hear about someone using Rust, its a very cool language
22:53:16 pep. It is indeed :)
22:54:00 SamWhited nice; my little toy client is also in Rust, but I've never gotten it far enough along to want to publish it.
22:54:00 Arc its a shame they haven't trimmed it down for embedded use tho, I'm still waiting on that
22:54:34 pep. Arc, there are quite a few use cases for it in embedded already from what I hear, but I have no experience in it
22:54:51 SamWhited Arc: you can actually build without the standard library which is where all the stuff that relies on the OS lives and you end up with a minimal core library which works great on embedded hardware
22:55:17 Arc SamWhited: oh really? do you have a link to that?
22:55:21 SamWhited yah, just a moment
22:55:38 pep. You heard about TockOS? Also as SamWhited says, have a look at https://github.com/japaric/xargo
22:55:42 Tobias has joined
22:55:59 SamWhited I'm not sure if there's a section in the rust book yet, but the stripped down version of the standard library with no OS stuff is called "core"
22:56:20 pep. There's a guy that's quite keen on doing embedded stuff in the Cambridge Meetup
22:56:35 SamWhited Arc: https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/first-edition/using-rust-without-the-standard-library.html might help
22:56:52 SamWhited has left
22:57:11 pep. https://github.com/thejpster/stellaris-launchpad
22:58:06 Arc Cambridge UK or Boston?
22:58:48 pep. UK
22:59:51 Arc SamWhited: that's excellent, i'll run some tests later
23:00:09 Arc oh, and can you bundle assembly with rust?
23:00:22 Arc either in-line or linked in different source files
23:00:30 Arc sorry im lazywebbing
23:00:39 SamWhited You can, search for the "rust nomicon", I think that has a chapter
23:00:47 Arc https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.12.0/book/inline-assembly.html
23:01:00 Arc very nice.
23:01:29 SamWhited Obviously all safety guarantees go out the window at that point :)
23:02:07 SamWhited Rust is a cool language, I wish I had more reason to use it day to day
23:02:26 pep. I wish I had more opportunities, reasons I have plenty of :P
23:03:03 Arc SamWhited: things like bitpacking and hashing routines are things i regularly optimize for
23:03:22 Arc well. "regularly" is an overstatement. but still.
23:03:38 jjrh has left
23:04:05 jjrh has left
23:04:58 jjrh has left
23:05:58 jjrh has left
23:08:08 jjrh has left
23:10:03 Tobias has joined
23:10:42 Valerian has joined
23:16:02 la|r|ma has joined
23:16:11 la|r|ma has joined
23:16:17 la|r|ma has joined
23:19:00 jjrh has left
23:19:03 Arc SamWhited: move to Portland, lets give you reasons to use it daily :-)
23:22:20 SamWhited Arc: I can't, I watched the TV show and now I can't go to Portland without laughing uncontrollably
23:23:03 SamWhited Also, I'm reasonably sure that it's a fictional place and that no one actually lives in Oregon.
23:24:18 Arc Portlandia is unfortunately closer to the truth than any of us are comfortable with, but it is a real place.
23:24:32 Tobias has joined
23:24:54 SamWhited If that show is any indication it actually reminds me a lot of Austin
23:25:44 Arc I've heard that as a comparison, but Portland is certainly weirder. For example, Austin doesn't have nude beaches that are a central social spot to just hang out
23:27:05 lovetox has left
23:27:54 vanitasvitae Is anyone else getting the permanent notification that Flow isnt typing anymore in conversations?
23:29:11 Arc or this (NSFW) https://pdxwnbr.org in which naked people basically take over the city, walk into a random convenience store or cafe and you're likely behind someone in their birthday suit
23:29:44 SamWhited Arc: hah, I've heard of that, sounds… interesting.
23:30:29 Arc CTRL-H held an after-party this year where naked people took over the hacker space
23:31:26 SamWhited In a hacker space full of laiths and laser cutters a naked after party just seems dangerous …
23:32:05 Arc the main room is a big coworking space and lounge. that's where I am now. all we have here is an occulus rift and a few 3d printers, totally fine for parties
23:32:18 Arc ctrl-h is 5 buildings and a shared backyard.
23:47:29 jjrh has left
23:47:47 Arc http://www.sheut.net/CTRLH-2017-11-07.jpg
23:52:38 daniel has left