Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 23:22, Mark Rejhon wrote: On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Gunnar Hellström wrote: That would include many elements. If such a message refresh would be sent, it would take a long time to display, with severe flicker as a result. That's right. However, again, (1) it's not "enfor

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/20/12 2:49 PM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > But give me a few days to test alternative protocol designs that > resolves the confusion altogether, or alternative methods of > wording the current protocol (using "Message Refresh" terminology > instead of

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Gunnar Hellström wrote: >>> That would include many elements. >>> If such a message refresh would be sent, it would take a long time to >>> display, with severe flicker as a result. >> >> That's right. However, again, (1) it's not "enforceable", and (2) I >> don'

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 22:49, Mark Rejhon wrote: On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Gunnar Hellström wrote: On 2012-08-20 10:20, Mark Rejhon wrote: GH> > When the sender composes the part of the refresh that has been transmitted before, elements shall not be included. I am not going to specifically di

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Gunnar Hellström wrote: > On 2012-08-20 10:20, Mark Rejhon wrote: > > GH> > When the sender composes the part of the refresh that has been > transmitted before, elements shall not be included. > > I am not going to specifically disallow any elements and order for

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 10:20, Mark Rejhon wrote: GH> > When the sender composes the part of the refresh that has been transmitted before, elements shall not be included. I am not going to specifically disallow any elements and order for either new/reset. It seems to me that you did not read my comme

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Peter Saint-Andre > wrote: >>> On 2012-08-20 11:47 AM, "Peter Saint-Andre" >> > wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/20/12 9:39 AM, Mark Rej

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 2012-08-20 11:47 AM, "Peter Saint-Andre" > > wrote: >>> >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> On 8/20/12 9:39 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: Well -- As it stands now, reprogramming RealJabb

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/20/12 10:11 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > > On 2012-08-20 11:47 AM, "Peter Saint-Andre" > wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 8/20/12 9:39 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: >>> Well -- As it stands no

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 11:47 AM, "Peter Saint-Andre" wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 8/20/12 9:39 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > > Well -- As it stands now, reprogramming RealJabber to use > > event=reset only (for both new and reset), or use event=new only > > (for both new and

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/20/12 9:39 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > Well -- As it stands now, reprogramming RealJabber to use > event=reset only (for both new and reset), or use event=new only > (for both new and reset), yields exactly identical behavior in > RealJabber. Absolu

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

Well -- As it stands now, reprogramming RealJabber to use event=reset only (for both new and reset), or use event=new only (for both new and reset), yields exactly identical behavior in RealJabber. Absolutely no UI difference, when starting a new message with event=reset, or refreshing a message i

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/20/12 2:15 AM, Mark Rejhon wrote: > > On 2012-08-20 3:32 AM, "Gunnar Hellström" > mailto:gunnar.hellst...@omnitor.se>> > wrote: >> >> On 2012-08-19 21:21, Gunnar Hellström wrote: >>> >>> On 2012-08-19 19:11, Mark Rejhon wrote: >

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

>> > > The exact same rule applies for 'new' so I do not like adding any differences in behavior between 'new' and 'reset'. >> > > >> > > I may instead merge 'new' and 'reset' to solve the confusion altogether. I need to do some thinking, since I intend exact behavior and I want to prevent vendors

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 11:10, Mark Rejhon wrote: On 2012-08-20 4:20 AM, "Mark Rejhon" > wrote: > > > On 2012-08-20 4:15 AM, "Mark Rejhon" > wrote: > > > 4.6.3 Refresh > > > > > > A message reset is a transmission of the sender's text from the begi

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 4:20 AM, "Mark Rejhon" wrote: > > > On 2012-08-20 4:15 AM, "Mark Rejhon" wrote: > > > 4.6.3 Refresh > > > > > > A message reset is a transmission of the sender's text from the beginning of the real-time message. The recipient can redisplay the real-time message as a result. It allow

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 4:15 AM, "Mark Rejhon" wrote: > > > On 2012-08-20 3:32 AM, "Gunnar Hellström" wrote: > > > > On 2012-08-19 21:21, Gunnar Hellström wrote: > >> > >> On 2012-08-19 19:11, Mark Rejhon wrote: > >>> > >>> > My proposal has now become: > > event='new' > Senders MUST us

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-20 3:32 AM, "Gunnar Hellström" wrote: > > On 2012-08-19 21:21, Gunnar Hellström wrote: >> >> On 2012-08-19 19:11, Mark Rejhon wrote: >>> >>> My proposal has now become: event='new' Senders MUST use this value when transmitting the first element containing Actio

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-19 21:21, Gunnar Hellström wrote: On 2012-08-19 19:11, Mark Rejhon wrote: My proposal has now become: event='new' Senders MUST use this value when transmitting the first element containing Action Elements (i.e. when sending the first character(s) of a new message). Recipient clien

Re: [Standards] review of XEP-0301 [ event='reset']

On 2012-08-19 21:21, Gunnar Hellström wrote: On 2012-08-19 19:11, Mark Rejhon wrote: My proposal has now become: event='new' Senders MUST use this value when transmitting the first element containing Action Elements (i.e. when sending the first character(s) of a new message). Recipient clien