I like Florian’s idea!
It won’t mess up with existing XEP-0256 implementations and if someone really
feels he can only deal with absolute timestamps he could use that optional
attribute.
It’s way easier to implement as opposed to implement a whole new XEP (+
abstraction layer, which deals with
Hi all,
If I need to implement a functionality (in an XMPP client and in an XMPP
server) whereby I indicate to a user if a message sent by him to another
user has been read/delivered/acknowledged, which XEP should I be
implementing? Additionally, I want the status of the messages to be synced
acro
How would chat markers work when they are used in the context of
pagination? Please consider the following use case to get a better
understanding of my question-
Assume there are 50 messages stored in a user's archive store. Of which a
marker of type 'delivered' is received for the 25th message. A
On 3 December 2014 at 23:14, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> BTW was it ever discussed to *simply* extend XEP-12 (and thus XEP-256)
> with an (optional) 'timestamp' attribute that contains an absolute time
> value?
>
I'd particularly like to see any response to this. It looks like a very
reasonable ave
On 03.12.2014 23:39, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 03.12.2014 19:16, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
>> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0319
>> (Last User Interaction in Presence).
>>
>> Abstract: This specification defines a way to communicate time of last user
>>
On 03.12.2014 19:16, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0319 (Last
> User Interaction in Presence).
>
> Abstract: This specification defines a way to communicate time of last user
> interaction with her system using XMPP presence no
How does the server, after it has responded to the IQ with a type=result
stanza, communicate errors in processing the query to the client that might
subsequently occur. What if the server is unable to send any subsequent
stanzas associated with the query? Is the server expected to hold off se
Hi,
Some comments from the author’s perspective inline.
On 03.12.2014, at 19:16, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to
> clarify an existing protocol?
It fills a gap for a clean and reliable reporting of idle (user inacti
Hi,
here’s my feedback for it.
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to
> clarify an existing protocol?
No. In my opinion, XEP-0256: Last Activity in Presence already covers
everything, which is needed for this use case.
XEP-0012 also says something abou
This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0319 (Last
User Interaction in Presence).
Abstract: This specification defines a way to communicate time of last user
interaction with her system using XMPP presence notifications.
URL: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0319.html
On 11/27/2014 03:34 PM, Goffi wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
>> * server will have to refuse stanzas with these namespaces when
>> component is down by some reason, so the namespace lease is permanent
>> and does not need any negotiation
>
> That's a good point, actually the bahaviour is not specified w
11 matches
Mail list logo
