https://logs.xmpp.org/council/2020-09-23?p=h#2020-09-23-d48e1db20c2de925
1) Roll Call Present: Jonas, Zash, Daniel, Dave Apologies: Georg 2) Agenda Bashing Zash wonders about Reactions. 3) (No) Editor's Update Jonas is still catching up on things. 4a) PR #983 (XEP-0060: Disallow '=' and ';' in NodeIDs to allow use in URIs and refer to PRECIS Stringprep) - https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/983 Jonas: [on-list] (default to -1; this is fixing the problem on the wrong end; the node ID should simply be URL-encoded) Daniel: [on-list] Dave: -1 (the node id is meant to be URL-encoded, surely) Zash: [on-list] (until we get a comment from an URI expert, but the URI bit seems wrong and the PRECIS part ought to have been a separate PR) Georg: [pending] 5) Pending Votes None. 6) Date of Next 2020-09-30 1500 UTC 7) AOB Zash queries the current status of Reactions [1] - it appears to be stalled since early this year, waiting for someone to figure out how it should work with Fastening (XEP-0422) [2]. Jonas thinks people may have been otherwise distracted for most of this year. Dave thinks that has already been worked out in the form of MAM-FC (MAM Fastening Collation; XEP-0427) [3], and it was expected the original authors would use that for reactions, though there is at least one outstanding comment against it (can't be used for both paging and refresh-since.) Jonas tries to fasten a hat to somebody. Dave does need to implement this anyway, including Reactions, which means someone has to write the XEP (would prefer it weren't him, but could be forced into it) - Jonas suggests collaborating with the original authors - Dave says their feedback was that they didn't like Fastening. Jonas suggests organising a (high-bandwidth) call to try to resolve this conflict. Georg is in admiration of Council's high-bandwidth call scheduling skills. Dave isn't sure that will be effective when there appears to be no desire to work on a general solution (not limited to Reactions only) in this space - Jonas expects impressions gained from reading emails can sometimes be misleading, so it may still be worth a try. Dave could do that when time allows, but is likely to implement it before then and feed any findings back into the spec - Jonas would prefer to avoid that, given there is an impression that Council/XSF is sometimes dismissive of authors; also dislikes de facto standards that come out of implementations. Zash suggests possibly starting with something simpler which can be generalised after experience - Dave welcomes a concrete proposal. Jonas asks about the original Reactions proposal, which seemed simple enough - Dave can't implement it on its own because of its interactions with archiving, for which there are already difficulties with receipts and markers, while MAM-FC should address both cases. Dave explains that Reactions itself is trivial, and there could even be a collation specifically for them, but then every other kind of thing would need its own specific collation, which leads to heavyweight stanza inspection and archiving on the server; anybody who doesn't like the design is invited to make a counter proposal. Jonas directs further discussion to the Standards room, where the authors might also be active. 8) Close Thanks Jonas, Tedd, et alia. Georg wanted to report from the Board meeting that the CS badge designer appears to have vanished, so anybody is welcome to move forward with whatever variant of badges (Tedd has hinted at doing some work on this [coming soon…].) Additionally, the idea of a compliance page on the home page was approved and Seve possibly almost maybe volunteered to take care of it [also coming soon…ish]. In case you thought it seemed to get earlier every year, it's time to move forward with CS-2021, so it doesn't end up being published mid-2021. Georg once again pushes Daniel for news of the fated A/V section - Daniel is still in the process of geographically relocating his existence, but will take care of it once that's completed. Georg wonders whether it should be blessed with an XEP number before that - Dave thinks so, since it will inevitably be accepted, so it makes sense to charge ahead with that and get it under the XSF IPR - Georg suggests putting it to a vote (next week.) Vanitasvitae, author of PR #983, agrees that URL encoding the item ID makes much more sense. [1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/reactions.html [2] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0422.html [3] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0427.html
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
