XSF Discussion - 2023-08-10

Emoticons*, probably

Like the things we had in the early 00s :)

Can anybody with an up-to-date clone of the xeps repo run `xmllint --nonet --noout --noent --loaddtd --xpath "//img/@src[not(starts-with(., 'data:'))]" xep-0001.xml`? Preferably somebody not on Arch?

It's part of the Makefile and I'm wondering if something has changed.

Or maybe I should ask the question the other way around. Anybody on Arch having issues building xeps?

> my friends are telling me [...] they need two things - a) - emotions, and b) - stickers. Stickers are already supported (XEP-0449), but client support is limited for now; I'd assume 'emotions' refers to indicating emotions via emoji and/or emoji reactions -- emoji is supported by all clients properly displaying unicode, and reactions are in XEP-0444, which is available in a number of clients

^inky

That xep isn't stickers, despite the name.

It's more like a sticker store xep

They are individual images, which may be part of a 'pack' containing other images that are related or in a similar style, which is the implementation of stickers on some networks; how do you interpret 'stickers?'

Everyone seems to have their own subtly different definition of 'stickers'

When you send a sticker the fact that it came from a pack or no doesn't matter to the recipient

We should find a common one that sticks to everyone

Conversations already supports stickers because the real stickers are a feature of the mobile keyboard!

How are those transmitted?

HTTP Upload :)

Makes sense

So the keyboard makes them available to the app as stupid simple images?

Yes

With my app I've done things to help with constantly re-downloading and storing the same image, but this is just an optimization

> When you send a sticker the fact that it came from a pack or no doesn't matter to the recipient And it doesn't have to matter, but there is the option of sharing the whole set as a pack too

theTedd, no! sticker packs come from a sticker store! sharing them between users is STEALING !!!!11!1eleven

those are 'restricted' packs; you can make your own with your amazingly terrible sketches

without being able to import packs like cheogram does stickers are unsable imo

simply because no open source keyboard has stickers

except one that you need to manually download each image individually. I did it for hundrends of them.

(yes i like pain)

Yes. Open source keyboards lack even usable emoji selector IME. It's a big problem

The ASK one works well for me.

and im not even talking about sending gifs that my partner wants :P

mdosch: it's ok ish but no search

I can write :startofemojiname and it finds it. :)

Most of the times good enough for me. :)

Oh yes, ask has the : search mode I forgot

Update with yesterday's feedback: https://bouah.net/specs/muc-token-invite.html https://github.com/Ppjet6/xeps/commit/ebabc202a0670512793de5421dbbae668ea47111

Maybe I should just make "limits" mandatory instead of a SHOULD

I agree

pep.: Well maybe not, like say you have a maker space and you want everyone who visits to join a muc, you put up a QR code, you probably never want to change it? (So valid forever, unlimited use)

Or business cards or something, idk

Maybe yeah.. Even though the maker space QR Code can be renewed every so often. The business card slightly less

Yeah, IIRC discord has this invite links can be limited or unlimited

I just thought that if we mandated limits we'd have one less disco feature.. Is this one really necessary. As for the mandating a default policy yeah no, a SHOULD is fine there, it's already a good enough incentive

Oh mandated *support* for limits, that seems fine

Maybe for revocation too then? Feels odd to be able to create but not revoke

Yea I just meant support for creating always-good-invites is nice

Yeah maybe re revocation.. Just that the listing and stuff.. it just makes the thing a bit more "involved" already

> Update with yesterday's feedback: https://bouah.net/specs/muc-token-invite.html > https://github.com/Ppjet6/xeps/commit/ebabc202a0670512793de5421dbbae668ea47111 Would it be interesting to use this XEP to invite random people in a video-call ? ↺

fwiw, this is really mostly useful for member-only rooms. I guess it could be used to grant specific affiliations at some point but for now it's really just "member"

Inviting someone to a room can already be done with a standard URI

If your video-call is member-only then sure :)

Being a member in a public room can still be useful

(It'd also work if it isn't, just that it's not necessary)

Yeah I guess

But to get in the room you don't need it