KevRevisiting my question from yesterday - can anyone find any evidence that routing behaviour for presence type='error' is defined anywhere in 6120/6121?
Kev3921 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
MattJKev, it does appear to be missing indeed
jonaswno erratum either
KevSo, full-JID is routed, bare JID is dropped, logically, right?
ZashHm, where would error-replies to probes go?
perflysthas joined
tahas joined
jonaswbare
ThibGhas joined
ThibGhas joined
KevBare, which wouldn't be delivered to the user. Which is right, I think.
KevOTOH 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)
KevYes.
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).
ZashLink Mauve: https://xkcd.com/1172/ ?
KevI'm assuming that's a fairly common workflow though, I do the same.
Link MauvePretty much.
mrdoctorwhohas left
thorstenhas joined
Marandastupid 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?
MarandaThe spec explicitly talks about the entry not existing otherwise not the page before/after it being empty.
danielhas left
HolgerYes, my understanding is that you'd return an empty page in that case.
MarandaHolger, considering some clients seem to trample on empty pages without an error though...
HolgerHuh.
Maranda(e.g. Movim)
danielhas joined
HolgerI would've expected clients will usually honour the 'complete' attribute and not even issue such a request in the first place.
MarandaHolger, movim doesn't apparently
HolgerI.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
Marandait will just send an query with rsm <after /> with the last entry.
HolgerAnd how does it then "trample"?
Marandawhich results in an empty page and just starts endlessly looping on that
Maranda^
HolgerUgh.
Holgeredhelas: ^
MarandaHolger, he knows
Maranda:P
HolgerAh.
MarandaI already reported the issue of it not respecting the complete attribute.
HolgerSounds like two issues to me.
MarandaHolger, but I wonder if I should do anything to prevent this with any other clunky/old implementation
Marandasending the error instead of the empty page works for Movim at least
MarandaHolger, well as long as I didn't miss anything behaving this way doesn't seem to break any MUST/SHOULD that I can see.
HolgerMaranda: Hehe, yes strictly speaking I'd agree, but I think you can deduce from the text that it goes against the intention.
HolgerI'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.
HolgerProbably not.
MarandaHolger, question does ejabberd include in results the entry specified in either after/before elements?
HolgerI hope not!
HolgerI'll double-check if you have any indication that it does :-)
HolgerThat would clearly go against the spec.
MarandaHolger, I'm trying to understand why apparently Movim doesn't trample with ejabberd as well.
danielhas left
HolgerMe 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
HolgerBut not I'm wondering whether I should add that item-not-found thing. Opposite problem of yours :-P
HolgerWould add code ugliness.
MarandaHolger, 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 🤣
Marandahehe
danielhas joined
HolgerMaranda: In the empty page returned by Metronome?
Marandayes
Marandaand it also sported complete="true"
apachhas left
Marandabut anyways since just throwing an error makes Movim happy... for now :P
HolgerWe 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
ZashGrr, why did the mailman URLs change?
jonaswdid you delete a message?
ZashOn 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
ZashDate: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 20:49:34 +0200
Subject: Re: [Standards] XEP-0292 vCard4 Reinventing the Wheel?
vanitasvitaehas left
ZashThat link goes to something about xep178, not vcard4
ZashThis 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
ZashHm, whatever happened to pubsub-since
Zash312
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
ZashIs there still consensus for having https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0292.html#self-iq ?
blablahas joined
ZashI 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
ZashThe 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.
ZashExtending that exception to arbitrary PubSub is just as easy as extending it to that single vcard4 iq query.
mimi89999has joined
mikaelahas left
UsLhas joined
MarandaHmmm
Marandais tempted to experiment with multiplexing on outgoing streams
MarandaI wonder if only Prosody wouldn't go "WTF?!" at me.
mikaelahas joined
MarandaI mean if people keept code for GTalk in place 🤣
andyhas left
Zashhas left
jonaswZash, 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
dosme: "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
dosevery single one of those is slightly not what I would like :/
jjrhhas left
SamWhitedWhat's missing? 0393 is what Slack and WhatsApp do I thought
moparisthebestFirst define markdown, which is hard enough
SamWhited(and deliberately not 'markdown', which most messengers don't actually support)
KevOn the one hand, yes it is, but on the other hand people mostly make do.
Kev(hard to define markdown, that is)
goffidos: markdown is not a wire format, there has been a long flam^W debate about this on standard@, and the subject is not closed.
SamWhitedHe'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.
dosoh wait, I might have raged too quickly. 0393 might be fine, have to reread
Demoaccounthas joined
goffiSamWhited: 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
SamWhiteddos: let me know, feedback would be appreciated.
mikaelahas joined
dosthe examples in that xep are confusing. had to reread Example 1 a few times to actually get it
lorddavidiiihas left
SamWhitedThat'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.
dosflow: 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
Marandaactually 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
dosriot has such switch as well. otoh, slack doesn't have iirc
dosanyway, for me looks like 0393 is fine after all, no need to flame ;D
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
flowdos, isn't the thing about markdown that you don't need to signal support for it?
flowbut yeah, xep393 probably lacks an extension element indicating that its <body/> is xep393 formated
dosflow: yeah, I thought about it after sending. makes sense
jonaswit doesn’t really make sense
jonaswnot everyone is going to emit markdown plaintext
jonaswor markdown-compatible plaintext
Alexhas joined
dosthere's no reason to not format *stuff like that* just because the sender didn't
flowjonasw, are you talking about signaling support for receiving markdown, or signaling that the data is markdown formated?
jonaswdos, think about automated things
jonaswflow, the latter
flowjonasw, well, but does asked for the former
jonaswoh, I missed that then?
flowand 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 MauveHello, 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 MauveThe main benefit of the latter is that 0084 describes much better what the image data actually are.
Link MauveBut the former is already implemented in more places.
Link MauveThe upgrade path would be trivial though.
MarandaThumb down, then already will not implement it
Link MauveIt’s being implemented as we talk.
Alexhas left
MarandaI'm eager to see what kind of ugly hack will come out of it ☺️
mikaelahas joined
Link MauveCurrent version is at: https://linkmauve.fr/extensions/xep-muc-avatar.html
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
anjanhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
MarandaLink Mauve: I meant for the PEP version
MarandaLink Mauve: that one is perfectly fine
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Link MauveI’d really really like to deprecate 0153 someday though.
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
pep.Maranda, shush you :)
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Marandapep.: 😜
Link MauveI vetoed its deprecation back then because of MUC avatars, but I’m now convinced we can implement them using MEP.
Link MauveOr something like that.
MarandaLink Mauve: probably by the time you deprecate 153, something to sub 84 will come out as well
MarandaIf it didn't already
Link MauveWhat do you think is missing from it?
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Andrew Nenakhovhas left
Andrew Nenakhovhas joined
Link MauveIt would also significantly lower the cost of upgrading to MIC.
Link MauveIt would also significantly lower the cost of upgrading to MIX.
MarandaI'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
peterjonasw: https://xmpp.org/registrar/ is there but might be updated properly?
XSF Discussion - 2018-08-21