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’ s/\bno\b/yes/
  104. Guus Right. 🙂
  105. Guus Tx
  106. jonas’ Rx
  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’ heh
  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 exactly!
  286. lovetox oob does not say in the xep anything about inline
  287. Ge0rG yes!
  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 Right.
  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