Revisiting my question from yesterday - can anyone find any evidence that routing behaviour for presence type='error' is defined anywhere in 6120/6121?
Kev
3921 said it must be routed to the user, but not using what rules, and 6121 seems to be completely silent, unless I'm just missing it.
blablahas joined
ralphmhas left
MattJ
Kev, it does appear to be missing indeed
jonasw
no erratum either
Kev
So, full-JID is routed, bare JID is dropped, logically, right?
Zash
Hm, where would error-replies to probes go?
perflysthas joined
tahas joined
jonasw
bare
ThibGhas joined
ThibGhas joined
Kev
Bare, which wouldn't be delivered to the user. Which is right, I think.
Kev
OTOH the error in response to the broadcast presence /would/ be delivered to the user, because that's to=full.
ralphmhas joined
jonasw
(which is also right)
Kev
Yes.
rionhas left
lskdjfhas left
danielhas left
danielhas joined
jubalhhas joined
mikaelahas joined
Valerianhas joined
lumihas joined
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
Chobbeshas left
Chobbeshas joined
blablahas joined
blablahas joined
Link Mauve
“15:43:43 Zash> Next Prosody won't allow GC1.0 joins, have we seen any ill effects of it yet?”, a tiny usability issue on my side, I used to just change my status in poezio after a network or power outage of my server, and it would automatically reconnect me back to all rooms, but without GC1.0 it instead gets an error back (which it could totally handle and issue a join, so that’s only a client needing to be fixed).
Zash
Link Mauve: https://xkcd.com/1172/ ?
Kev
I'm assuming that's a fairly common workflow though, I do the same.
Link Mauve
Pretty much.
mrdoctorwhohas left
thorstenhas joined
Maranda
stupid question probably, but MAM RSM wise is it proper to return item-not-found if paging before/after a certain index (which actually exists) yields no results?
Maranda
The spec explicitly talks about the entry not existing otherwise not the page before/after it being empty.
danielhas left
Holger
Yes, my understanding is that you'd return an empty page in that case.
Maranda
Holger, considering some clients seem to trample on empty pages without an error though...
Holger
Huh.
Maranda
(e.g. Movim)
danielhas joined
Holger
I would've expected clients will usually honour the 'complete' attribute and not even issue such a request in the first place.
Maranda
Holger, movim doesn't apparently
Holger
I.e. I would've thought this is a corner case where messages were deleted from the DB while the client is querying it.
thorstenhas joined
Maranda
it will just send an query with rsm <after /> with the last entry.
Holger
And how does it then "trample"?
Maranda
which results in an empty page and just starts endlessly looping on that
Maranda
^
Holger
Ugh.
Holger
edhelas: ^
Maranda
Holger, he knows
Maranda
:P
Holger
Ah.
Maranda
I already reported the issue of it not respecting the complete attribute.
Holger
Sounds like two issues to me.
Maranda
Holger, but I wonder if I should do anything to prevent this with any other clunky/old implementation
Maranda
sending the error instead of the empty page works for Movim at least
Maranda
Holger, well as long as I didn't miss anything behaving this way doesn't seem to break any MUST/SHOULD that I can see.
Holger
Maranda: Hehe, yes strictly speaking I'd agree, but I think you can deduce from the text that it goes against the intention.
Holger
I'm not sure there's use-cases where the clients would be interested in the difference between a real item-not-found and an empty page.
Holger
Probably not.
Maranda
Holger, question does ejabberd include in results the entry specified in either after/before elements?
Holger
I hope not!
Holger
I'll double-check if you have any indication that it does :-)
Holger
That would clearly go against the spec.
Maranda
Holger, I'm trying to understand why apparently Movim doesn't trample with ejabberd as well.
danielhas left
Holger
Me too, especially as I think ejabberd is violating that item-not-found MUST in that it *never* returns that error.
Holger
> does ejabberd include in results the entry specified in either after/before elements?
Ok I checked, answer is "no".
winfriedhas left
Holger
But not I'm wondering whether I should add that item-not-found thing. Opposite problem of yours :-P
Holger
Would add code ugliness.
Maranda
Holger, the only thing that looked slightly off in that empty page was the <set /> element but otherwise was correct so I'm a bit in a 🤷♂️ mode atm 🤣
Maranda
hehe
danielhas joined
Holger
Maranda: In the empty page returned by Metronome?
Maranda
yes
Maranda
and it also sported complete="true"
apachhas left
Maranda
but anyways since just throwing an error makes Movim happy... for now :P
Holger
We already query an additional message from the DB (and then throw it away) in order to set complete=true/false. So we'd need another one to decide on whether to return that error.
Valerianhas left
danielhas left
Alexhas joined
Valerianhas joined
danielhas joined
Alexhas left
Valerianhas left
Valerianhas joined
lnjhas left
lnjhas joined
404.cityhas joined
Alexhas joined
danielhas left
la|r|mahas joined
danielhas joined
Syndacehas left
ThibGhas left
ThibGhas joined
efrithas joined
jonaswhas left
jonaswhas joined
Valerianhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Marandahas left
Marandahas left
Marandahas joined
danielhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Marandahas left
Marandahas joined
Marandahas left
danielhas joined
mrdoctorwhohas joined
goffihas left
danielhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
lskdjfhas joined
perflysthas joined
danielhas joined
404.cityhas left
Marandahas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
muppethhas joined
muppethhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
404.cityhas joined
la|r|mahas left
Zashhas left
danielhas left
Zash
Grr, why did the mailman URLs change?
jonasw
did you delete a message?
Zash
On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 22:04 +0200, Andreas Monitzer wrote:
> Why doesn't it use plain PEP, instead defining its own protocol?
It did, see this thread:
http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-April/024355.html
Zash
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 20:49:34 +0200
Subject: Re: [Standards] XEP-0292 vCard4 Reinventing the Wheel?
vanitasvitaehas left
Zash
That link goes to something about xep178, not vcard4
Zash
This looks more relevant: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-April/024333.html
ThibGhas joined
ThibGhas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
danielhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Alexhas left
Syndacehas joined
danielhas left
winfriedhas joined
MbJ3has left
MbJ3has joined
Yagizahas joined
jjrhhas left
goffihas joined
mikaelahas left
mikaelahas joined
Guushas left
matlaghas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
danielhas left
Zash
Hm, whatever happened to pubsub-since
Zash
312
labdsfhas left
danielhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
doshas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
doshas joined
doshas left
doshas joined
doshas left
apachhas left
MbJ3has left
mimi89999has joined
apachhas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
doshas joined
mikaelahas joined
la|r|mahas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
lhas joined
lhas joined
blablahas joined
lskdjfhas joined
jubalhhas joined
blablahas joined
UsLhas joined
blablahas joined
Dave Cridlandhas left
andyhas left
andyhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
winfriedhas joined
danielhas left
bjchas joined
j.rhas joined
Zash
Is there still consensus for having https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0292.html#self-iq ?
blablahas joined
Zash
I personally don't see the point at this time, doing a PubSub get-item(s) query seems just as likely to work/not work as that, and doesn't require more code over what's already there for PEP/222/223
Zash
The argument that it's needed to work in MUC doesn't hold because it does not work in MUC without a special exception to re-route such IQ stanzas to the bare JID, like we happen to have for vcard-temp.
Zash
Extending that exception to arbitrary PubSub is just as easy as extending it to that single vcard4 iq query.
mimi89999has joined
mikaelahas left
UsLhas joined
Maranda
Hmmm
Marandais tempted to experiment with multiplexing on outgoing streams
Maranda
I wonder if only Prosody wouldn't go "WTF?!" at me.
mikaelahas joined
Maranda
I mean if people keept code for GTalk in place 🤣
andyhas left
Zashhas left
jonasw
Zash, I agree with your view
Zashhas left
j.rhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
blablahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
dos
me: "Slack has Markdown, Riot has Markdown... I want Markdown my XMPP client, should be as simple as putting some mark to the message "markdown on". there has be a XEP for that already!"
XMPP: uhm... XEP-0393? XEP-0394? or... https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/content-types.html?
me: damn you xmpp
dos
every single one of those is slightly not what I would like :/
jjrhhas left
SamWhited
What's missing? 0393 is what Slack and WhatsApp do I thought
moparisthebest
First define markdown, which is hard enough
SamWhited
(and deliberately not 'markdown', which most messengers don't actually support)
Kev
On the one hand, yes it is, but on the other hand people mostly make do.
Kev
(hard to define markdown, that is)
goffi
dos: markdown is not a wire format, there has been a long flam^W debate about this on standard@, and the subject is not closed.
SamWhited
He's not looking for a wire format, he's looking to enter something in a text box and have it appear formatted. How that's transmitted on the wire doesn't matter, I suspect.
dos
oh wait, I might have raged too quickly. 0393 might be fine, have to reread
Demoaccounthas joined
goffi
SamWhited: he's talking about a "markdown on" message mark, so I take it as a wire format. Else it doesn't matter which flavour of markdown you are using as long as you can convert it to wire format (like the RIP XHTML-IM)
ThibGhas joined
SamWhited
dos: let me know, feedback would be appreciated.
mikaelahas joined
dos
the examples in that xep are confusing. had to reread Example 1 a few times to actually get it
lorddavidiiihas left
SamWhited
That's good feedback, thanks :) Driving now, ping anything you find to to sam@samwhited.com or standards at and I'll try to fix it.
lskdjfhas joined
jjrhhas left
mikaelahas joined
flow
dos, https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/bmh.html
dos
flow: ah, much butter than the content type one. however, 0393 seems to be fine after all. it doesn't have any way to singalize its support though, so maybe 0393+bmh would be a good idea? :D
dos
(well, probably not)
pep.
goffi: I don't think he's talking about wire format, but your comment still applies. In any case that only needs to be a client thing and not bloat^Wdirectly in body
Maranda
actually it might not be so complicated to implement either 🤔
pep.
In fractal (matrix client) there's this thing where you can check "markdown" iirc, and then input stuff in markdown, that'll be translated into some kind of rich text, (and advertized as such). I assume they do that so you can _also_ use plain text, and not have it displayed funky, which makes sense
pep.
(à la xhtml-im, then)
pep.
But let's not revive the flamewar
dos
riot has such switch as well. otoh, slack doesn't have iirc
dos
anyway, for me looks like 0393 is fine after all, no need to flame ;D
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
flow
dos, isn't the thing about markdown that you don't need to signal support for it?
flow
but yeah, xep393 probably lacks an extension element indicating that its <body/> is xep393 formated
dos
flow: yeah, I thought about it after sending. makes sense
jonasw
it doesn’t really make sense
jonasw
not everyone is going to emit markdown plaintext
jonasw
or markdown-compatible plaintext
Alexhas joined
dos
there's no reason to not format *stuff like that* just because the sender didn't
flow
jonasw, are you talking about signaling support for receiving markdown, or signaling that the data is markdown formated?
jonasw
dos, think about automated things
jonasw
flow, the latter
flow
jonasw, well, but does asked for the former
jonasw
oh, I missed that then?
flow
and yes, I aggree with you, that is why I wrote that xep393 is probably missing "an extension element indicating that its <body/> is xep393 formated"
SamWhitedhas left
SamWhitedhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
alexishas joined
lovetoxhas joined
lskdjfhas left
alexishas left
lskdjfhas left
j.rhas joined
lskdjfhas joined
404.cityhas left
404.cityhas joined
Martinhas left
Martinhas joined
blablahas joined
Guushas left
Lancehas joined
blablahas joined
danielhas left
Alexishas joined
waqashas joined
lskdjfhas joined
Guushas left
Alexishas left
Alexhas left
404.cityhas left
j.rhas joined
404.cityhas joined
Marandahas joined
danielhas left
lskdjfhas joined
goffihas left
jjrhhas left
efrithas left
efrithas joined
MbJ3has left
Lancehas left
lskdjfhas joined
ralphmhas left
jjrhhas left
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
Zashhas left
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
la|r|mahas joined
Steve Killehas left
Tobiashas joined
Tobiashas joined
Steve Killehas left
Zashhas left
Steve Killehas left
UsLhas joined
Zashhas left
404.cityhas left
Lancehas joined
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
j.rhas left
marchas joined
lskdjfhas joined
ralphmhas joined
valohas left
valohas joined
la|r|mahas left
la|r|mahas joined
anjanhas left
anjanhas joined
lorddavidiiihas left
Dave Cridlandhas left
Lancehas left
Guushas left
Tobiashas joined
mikaelahas left
Tobiashas joined
anjanhas left
Alexhas joined
goffihas joined
mikaelahas joined
thorstenhas joined
marchas left
thorstenhas left
thorstenhas joined
404.cityhas joined
SamWhitedhas left
peterhas joined
Guushas left
Yagizahas left
Guushas left
Guushas joined
labdsfhas left
jjrhhas left
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas joined
mimi89999has joined
labdsfhas left
peterhas left
jjrhhas left
Link Mauve
Hello, I wrote a XEP about MUC avatars based on 0153, Ejabberd’s MUC avatar tutorial and disco#info, but now I’m having second-thoughts about it and might instead favour PubSub on MUC JID, so we can finally deprecate 0153.
Link Mauve
The main benefit of the latter is that 0084 describes much better what the image data actually are.
Link Mauve
But the former is already implemented in more places.
Link Mauve
The upgrade path would be trivial though.
Maranda
Thumb down, then already will not implement it
Link Mauve
It’s being implemented as we talk.
Alexhas left
Maranda
I'm eager to see what kind of ugly hack will come out of it ☺️
mikaelahas joined
Link Mauve
Current version is at: https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/xep-muc-avatar.html
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
anjanhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Maranda
Link Mauve: I meant for the PEP version
Maranda
Link Mauve: that one is perfectly fine
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Link Mauve
I’d really really like to deprecate 0153 someday though.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
pep.
Maranda, shush you :)
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Maranda
pep.: 😜
Link Mauve
I vetoed its deprecation back then because of MUC avatars, but I’m now convinced we can implement them using MEP.
Link Mauve
Or something like that.
Maranda
Link Mauve: probably by the time you deprecate 153, something to sub 84 will come out as well
Maranda
If it didn't already
Link Mauve
What do you think is missing from it?
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Link Mauve
It would also significantly lower the cost of upgrading to MIC.✎
Link Mauve
It would also significantly lower the cost of upgrading to MIX. ✏
Maranda
I'm not saying that something is missing from it, I'm strongly implying that publish subscribe isn't the holy grail that solves anything and is appropriate for everything
Tobiashas left
Tobiashas joined
winfriedhas joined
winfriedhas joined
thorstenhas joined
Guushas left
Guushas joined
Guushas left
jubalhhas joined
jubalhhas left
blablahas joined
Martinhas joined
Martinhas joined
Lancehas joined
rionhas joined
SamWhitedhas left
doshas left
doshas joined
SamWhitedhas joined
vanitasvitaehas left
lorddavidiiihas left
peterhas joined
ralphmhas left
marchas joined
efrithas left
danielhas left
tuxhas left
lnjhas left
404.cityhas left
404.cityhas joined
404.cityhas left
doshas left
doshas joined
apachhas left
labdsfhas left
danielhas left
bjchas joined
danielhas joined
muppethhas left
apachhas left
peter
jonasw: https://xmpp.org/registrar/ is there but might be updated properly?