XSF Discussion - 2019-07-24

  1. adityaborikar has left

  2. Wojtek has joined

  3. pdurbin has left

  4. Wojtek has left

  5. arc has left

  6. arc has joined

  7. lskdjf has left

  8. waqas has joined

  9. arc has left

  10. arc has joined

  11. pdurbin has joined

  12. pdurbin has left

  13. lumi has left

  14. zach has left

  15. zach has joined

  16. alacer has left

  17. alacer has joined

  18. Chobbes has left

  19. alacer has left

  20. alacer has joined

  21. alacer has left

  22. alacer has joined

  23. alacer has left

  24. adityaborikar has joined

  25. andy has left

  26. adityaborikar has left

  27. adityaborikar has joined

  28. andy has joined

  29. waqas has left

  30. pdurbin has joined

  31. neshtaxmpp has joined

  32. Tobias has joined

  33. karoshi has joined

  34. Syndace has left

  35. pdurbin has left

  36. pdurbin has joined

  37. goffi has joined

  38. goffi has left

  39. goffi has joined

  40. wurstsalat has joined

  41. Lance has left

  42. goffi has left

  43. goffi has joined

  44. sezuan has joined

  45. Nekit has joined

  46. COM8 has joined

  47. COM8 has left

  48. goffi has left

  49. Nekit has left

  50. Nekit has joined

  51. Mikaela has joined

  52. alameyo has left

  53. alameyo has joined

  54. lnj has joined

  55. murabito has left

  56. remko has joined

  57. COM8 has joined

  58. COM8 has left

  59. mimi89999 has left

  60. mimi89999 has joined

  61. waqas has joined

  62. adityaborikar has left

  63. adityaborikar has joined

  64. Dele (Mobile) has joined

  65. dele2 has joined

  66. lskdjf has joined

  67. Nekit has left

  68. dele2 has left

  69. krauq has left

  70. krauq has joined

  71. Syndace has joined

  72. debacle has joined

  73. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  74. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  75. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  76. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  77. Guus

    jonas’ - are you available?

  78. lumi has joined

  79. waqas has left

  80. waqas has joined

  81. lnj has left

  82. lnj has joined

  83. Nekit has joined

  84. UsL has left

  85. waqas has left

  86. adityaborikar has left

  87. adityaborikar has joined

  88. jonas’

    depends on your definition of "available", Guus

  89. Guus

    jonas’: I've got quick questions about muclumbus, but I'm feeding the offspring now

  90. Guus

    Did my one-on-one message arrive? If so, I'll follow up on that after lunch

  91. jonas’

    Guus, no it did not, but that’s probably because you sent it to an account on which I’m currently not available

  92. jonas’

    an account which I generally prefer for 1:1 messages

  93. jonas’

    is there a reason we cannot discuss this in a more public venue, like here or operators@? (I still can’t join jdev@)

  94. Guus

    Didn't want to bother others. Will do here

  95. Guus

    Simple question really

  96. Guus

    Is-open, does that include public rooms that at the time of query cannot be joined because of a server policy (eg: amount of occupants is at a configured max)?

  97. jonas’

    Guus, no, because muclumbus does not attempt to join rooms

  98. jonas’

    it only works with the info available from disco#info

  99. Ge0rG

    so yes, it does include those rooms

  100. Holger has left

  101. jonas’

    oh, yeah

  102. jonas’

    I got that inverted

  103. jonas’


  104. Guus

    Right. 🙂

  105. Guus


  106. jonas’


  107. waqas has joined

  108. Holger has joined

  109. waqas has left

  110. dragonspirit810 has joined

  111. pdurbin has left

  112. Guus

    jonas’ follow-up question. The description of the 'q' form field is: "Optional string. Operates like the search box on the website."

  113. Guus

    ... how does the website behave?

  114. Guus

    I've now got: split value on whitespace, and split the to-be evaluated value the same way - then check if the evaluated value split contains all of the q split.

  115. jonas’

    Guus, it’s not properly documented, as you’ve found

  116. jonas’

    it is I think a shlex.split in python, which means that you can search for stuff including spaces by writing `"foo bar"` into the search box

  117. Guus

    website doesn't appear to do partial text search, so the 'split on whitespace' thing made most sense.

  118. Guus

    but might be incomplete, or plain wrong.

  119. jonas’

    the resulting keywords are fed into SQL surrounded by `%`

  120. jonas’

    https://search.jabbercat.org/search?q=gefl%C3%BC this shows partial match

  121. jonas’

    https://search.jabbercat.org/search?q=gefl%C3%BC this shows a partial match

  122. Guus

    oh, shoot, I missed the 3-character minimum thingy

  123. jonas’

    that’s a deployment-specific option

  124. Guus

    yeah, but it's why I though it was not doing partial matches

  125. Guus

    I searched for 'te', didn't get 'test' results.

  126. Guus

    (and didn't read the bright red warning message)

  127. jonas’


  128. flow

    pff warning messages, nobody reads those, c.f. compiler warnings

  129. Guus

    all search terms are AND'ed, nor OR'ed, right?

  130. jonas’

    Guus, yes

  131. Guus

    q, rolling version 2 ...

  132. valo has left

  133. Dele (Mobile) has joined

  134. dragonspirit810 has left

  135. valo has joined

  136. Guus

    This seems to work fine. If I put this on a publicly reachable server, is there a way for you to test this, jonas’ ?

  137. Guus

    (or anyone else, for that matter?)

  138. jonas’

    Guus, yes, I have a test client software

  139. jonas’

    it’s even included in the public repo I think https://github.com/horazont/muchopper/blob/master/examples/request.py

  140. Guus

    that seems like something I can run myself

  141. Ge0rG is running a mirror bot that forks the pubsub data. Sometimes.

  142. Guus

    oh, but it doesnt create/populate mucs, I think?

  143. jonas’

    Guus, no, it doesn’t

  144. jonas’

    it only queries the search thing

  145. Chobbes has joined

  146. matlag has left

  147. matlag has joined

  148. pdurbin has joined

  149. Chobbes has left

  150. Chobbes has joined

  151. Nekit has left

  152. pdurbin has left

  153. Chobbes has left

  154. goffi has joined

  155. Alex has left

  156. Alex has joined

  157. curen has left

  158. Chobbes has joined

  159. Chobbes has left

  160. Chobbes has joined

  161. sezuan has left

  162. patrick has joined

  163. winfried has left

  164. winfried has joined

  165. DebXWoody has left

  166. adityaborikar has left

  167. adityaborikar has joined

  168. intosi has left

  169. DebXWoody has joined

  170. intosi has joined

  171. stpeter has joined

  172. peter has joined

  173. pdurbin has joined

  174. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  175. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  176. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  177. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  178. curen has joined

  179. Lance has joined

  180. Chobbes has left

  181. pdurbin has left

  182. Chobbes has joined

  183. Andrew Nenakhov has left

  184. Andrew Nenakhov has joined

  185. Lance has left

  186. wojtek has joined

  187. lovetox has joined

  188. Lance has joined

  189. kokonoe has left

  190. kokonoe has joined

  191. adityaborikar has left

  192. rion has left

  193. rion has joined

  194. pdurbin has joined

  195. adityaborikar has joined

  196. pdurbin has left

  197. zach has left

  198. pep.

    I sent a link with poezio, and then I realized it was actually an image and some clients would display it a bit more user-friendly if I included the right tags. I sent an LMC with an OOB tag, but Conversations and dino don't display the picture anyway. Is that a bug? feature?

  199. pep.

    The XEP says: To deal with multiple payloads, the sender MUST re-send the entire stanza, only altering id and the payloads being corrected and adding the 'replace' payload. It is expected that the receiver SHOULD then treat the new stanza as complete replacement for all the payloads received in the original stanza.

  200. Dele (Mobile) has left

  201. Alex has left

  202. debacle has left

  203. Lance has left

  204. Alex has joined

  205. Lance has joined

  206. adityaborikar has left

  207. lovetox

    read this the first time

  208. lovetox

    was that not changed a few weeks ago?

  209. lovetox

    LMC is about body for me

  210. lovetox

    and not all payloads

  211. goffi has left

  212. Ge0rG

    pep.: OOB is abused by Conversations and other clients for inline media, with the restriction that url must be equal to message body

  213. goffi has joined

  214. Ge0rG

    not sure if you can LMC a picture into a message, though, as changing the type of message is forbidden by LMC

  215. lovetox

    its not abused at all

  216. lovetox

    or your definition of abused is weird

  217. Alex has left

  218. lovetox

    oob adds a url to a message, and thats what we do

  219. lovetox

    using the xep like it was intended

  220. lovetox

    how i display messages with a oob tag is up to the client

  221. lovetox

    and not a concern of the xep

  222. Alex has joined

  223. Ge0rG

    lovetox: the abuse is because it's essentially used for inline images / media, and because of the undocumented body=url requirement

  224. lovetox

    how is that an abuse, to display a url added via oob inline?!

  225. lovetox

    the XEP makes zero statements as to how a client has to display a oob url

  226. Ge0rG

    lovetox: yes, so I could use the same syntax to append my avatar to all my messages.

  227. lovetox

    yeah and?

  228. Ge0rG

    it would be an equally legal use of 0066

  229. lovetox

    people not going to chat with you long when you do that

  230. lovetox

    not sure where the abuse is though

  231. lovetox

    protocol wise, you abusing people with messages, yes thats clear

  232. Ge0rG

    lovetox: only people using a client that's not adhering to XEPs will notice.

  233. Ge0rG

    All my messages are verbal abuse, nevermind the OOB

  234. Ge0rG

    OOB is not the right XEP for inline media, because it doesn't define how to display the URI, and because there is SIMS. Furthermore, clients only showing OOB media if url==body are enforcing an invisible specification.

  235. Ge0rG

    It's all wrong.

  236. Ge0rG

    It's only slightly less wrong than just HEADing every URL that's sent to you in a message body.

  237. lovetox

    you follow the notion that you think you got to decide if my client displays something inline or not

  238. lovetox

    there is no invisible specification

  239. Ge0rG

    lovetox: no, only that I'm the one who has to decide _how_ I intended my message to be shown

  240. lovetox

    you just found out implementation details of algorithm that decideds what to display inline

  241. lovetox

    and now you think its a invisible specification for you

  242. lovetox

    like its your job that a picture displays inline in MY client

  243. Ge0rG

    lovetox: XEPs are about interoperability between systems. If I see an image that I send inline, I expect your client to also display it inline, maybe with the exception that you explicitly disabled inline media.

  244. Ge0rG

    lovetox: as a client author, if I want to tell other clients to display a certain file inline, I now need to know that OOB has to be used (despite OOB not being made for inline media), and that I need to set the body to the URL, leave empty the description and send whatever text I want to accompany that image as a separate message. None of that is written down anywhere.

  245. lovetox

    There can be an endless settings go into the decision of a client if something is displayed inline

  246. lovetox

    you should not expect anything

  247. lovetox

    you should provide all data necessary to display something inline

  248. lovetox

    but thats about it

  249. Ge0rG

    lovetox: but you can keep pretending that there is no "inline media" and that all your client does is to use some creative rules to magically embed linked image files.

  250. Ge0rG

    > you should provide all data necessary to display something inline Yes, this is exactly what the fuss is about

  251. lovetox

    The problem is that you want to dictate UI and behaviour on another client, on such a complex topic as displaying weblinks inline

  252. kokonoe has left

  253. Ge0rG

    lovetox: see, we have a fundamental disagreement on the basic assumption.

  254. Ge0rG

    lovetox: you speak about displaying weblinks, I speak about inline media.

  255. lovetox

    same story sorry

  256. Ge0rG

    no, those are completely different.

  257. Ge0rG

    lovetox: given your premise, I agree with all you said.

  258. lovetox

    not at all, its all some file on a webserver

  259. kokonoe has joined

  260. Ge0rG

    OOB is okay'ish for letting another client know that you reference a website or page of some sorts.

  261. Ge0rG

    but it's not how it's used by at least Conversations.

  262. lovetox

    So if i reference a website on facebook, the page shows inline

  263. lovetox

    thats my messenger, so i expect your client now to display it inline

  264. lovetox

    following your logic

  265. Ge0rG

    lovetox: please just stop.

  266. Ge0rG

    lovetox: as I said, we are speaking about two fundamentally different things.

  267. Ge0rG

    lovetox: please don't try to interpret what I said in the context of linking websites.

  268. lovetox

    I know you speak about pictures, but i already told you i dont accept your argument that this is not the same

  269. lovetox

    both can be displayed inline, both are displayed inline in real world by clients

  270. Ge0rG

    lovetox: yes, but the message is different.

  271. Ge0rG

    inline media: "here is a picture that I attach to my message" website reference: "here is a random weblink with which your client may do whatever it wants"

  272. lovetox

    so your argument is SIMS does not support weblinks

  273. lovetox

    so there is no way to tell other clients to show it inline

  274. lovetox

    hence you cant expect it to do it

  275. Ge0rG

    lovetox: what?

  276. Ge0rG

    I have never said anything about website references. I've been exclusively talking about inline media

  277. Ge0rG

    even in my first message, I explicitly wrote that.

  278. lovetox

    yeah so if SIMS would support sharing a website reference, and SIMS = Inline Media, then you would expect to see the website displayed inline?

  279. Ge0rG

    lovetox: sorry, I can't follow you.

  280. lovetox

    how do you tell a client to show a media inline?

  281. Ge0rG

    it looks a bit like you are trying to ask me trick questions to make me issue absurd statements.

  282. lovetox

    just by using SIMS right?

  283. lovetox

    its not a trick question, i think i understand what you are trying to say

  284. lovetox

    SIMS is not for website references

  285. Ge0rG


  286. lovetox

    oob does not say in the xep anything about inline

  287. Ge0rG


  288. Ge0rG

    SIMS is designed for inline media only

  289. Ge0rG

    it's a bit overengineered, but nevertheless.

  290. Ge0rG

    so for website references, you use something else than SIMS.

  291. Ge0rG

    you might use OOB, or just rely on the receiving client to parse the URL out of your body

  292. lovetox

    just for the record, i dont think anybody is opposed to implement SIMS over oob

  293. lovetox

    1. SIMS was not really a thing when this was implemented

  294. lovetox

    2. OOB is alot less to implement for clients

  295. lovetox

    so thats why this was chosen

  296. Ge0rG

    Yes, but it's still abuse of OOB.

  297. Ge0rG

    Also with OOB for inline media, you need to HEAD the URL to fetch the file type and size, before you can make any reasonable action with it or display an icon to the user

  298. lovetox

    i still dont see where the abuse is, the oob xep even shares a picture in its example

  299. lovetox

    so yes this XEP was clearly intended to share also links to media on the web

  300. Nekit has joined

  301. Ge0rG

    but not for inline media in the client. ;)

  302. lovetox

    how you come to that conclusion is not clear to me, there is no way to indicate a inline display hint in oob, and your conclusion is : Its an abuse to show it inline

  303. Ge0rG

    no, it's an abuse for a sender to use OOB for inline media

  304. Ge0rG

    and for the recipient to imply that body==url --> inline media

  305. lovetox

    if your goal is to get more clients to use SIMS, i think you will be more successuful if you hint at the benefits that SIMS has over oob, like communicating the inline wish. Instead of shouting Abuse

  306. Ge0rG

    lovetox: do you know which clients implement SIMS?

  307. Zash

    Communicating hashes for integrity checks, ability to use different transports, thumbnails, what else are benefits of SIMS?

  308. pep.

    "Ge0rG> lovetox: no, only that I'm the one who has to decide _how_ I intended my message to be shown" something something 393 /me hides

  309. Holger

    > lovetox: do you know which clients implement SIMS? Movim IIRC?

  310. lovetox

    Ge0rG, Movim, Psi

  311. lovetox

    maybe converse, but not sure

  312. Ge0rG

    Zash: no need to do a HTTP HEAD

  313. Holger

    > Communicating hashes for integrity checks, ability to use different transports, thumbnails, what else are benefits of SIMS? I think edhelas was interested in metadata such as the size to avoid HEAD requests.

  314. Holger


  315. Zash

    Yeah, size and file type

  316. Holger

    And OMEMO people don't want to reveal that data. So I guess chances for implementation might be better once there's full stanza encryption.

  317. Ge0rG

    Speaking of OMEMO, https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/omemo-media-sharing.html combines the worst of both worlds.

  318. Ge0rG

    > The sending entity MAY also generate a thumbnail as a JPEG data uri and include that in the same message. The aesgcm:// and the data:image/jpep, are seperated by a new line character.

  319. Ge0rG

    Nuff' said.

  320. zach has joined

  321. pdurbin has joined

  322. arc has left

  323. arc has joined

  324. Lance has left

  325. pdurbin has left

  326. Lance has joined

  327. mr.fister has left

  328. Tobias has left

  329. UsL has joined

  330. stpeter has left

  331. peter has left

  332. arc has left

  333. arc has joined

  334. Chobbes has left

  335. Chobbes has joined

  336. remko has left

  337. pdurbin has joined

  338. pdurbin has left

  339. kokonoe has left

  340. kokonoe has joined

  341. curen has left

  342. arc has left

  343. Lance has left

  344. arc has joined

  345. lnj has left

  346. stpeter has joined

  347. peter has joined

  348. Chobbes has left

  349. lovetox has left

  350. Nekit has left

  351. Lance has joined

  352. wojtek has left

  353. Mikaela has left

  354. Chobbes has joined

  355. Mikaela has joined

  356. pdurbin has joined

  357. karoshi has left

  358. dragonspirit810 has joined

  359. pdurbin has left

  360. dragonspirit810 has left

  361. Mikaela has left

  362. Chobbes has left

  363. patrick has left

  364. UsL has left

  365. UsL has joined

  366. moparisthebest has left

  367. goffi has left

  368. Chobbes has joined

  369. moparisthebest has joined

  370. Chobbes has left