On 11.04.2015 19:39, Florian Schmaus wrote:
* Variant 1
The message type of an ack message MUST match the type of the message
with the related receipt request, if it's of type 'groupchat'. It SHOULD
match the type otherwise. A receiving entity MUST NOT make any
assumptions about the message
On 13.04.2015 22:35, Christian Schudt wrote:
Sounds good to me… except XEP-0045 still uses „MUST NOT“ for groupchat-type
in private occupant-to-occupant messages.
Might be inconsistent wording across the two specs.
Furthermore I can understand the issue raised in your linked post [1]: In
Sounds good to me… except XEP-0045 still uses „MUST NOT“ for groupchat-type in
private occupant-to-occupant messages.
Might be inconsistent wording across the two specs.
Furthermore I can understand the issue raised in your linked post [1]: In
software an empty String and a null reference
Dear all,
We are in 2015, it will be nice to do a point about BOSH support of XMPP
server softwares.
The XEP-0124 is in 1.11 version since 2014-04-09 - 1 year.
Link : https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html
With this point, we will inform dev teams to update it.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
On 4/11/15, 1:36 PM, Christian Schudt christian.sch...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
I think Variant 1 violates XEP-0045: When receiving a „request“ message from
an occupant in a MUC room (type=groupchat), the receiver would send a receipt
to the sender directly, not to the MUC room, by simply sending it
* Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) jhild...@cisco.com [2015-04-13 17:39]:
Headline also has the nice property that servers doing offline SHOULD
NOT hold on to headlines; that seems to fit the intent here. Probably
needs some testing in the real world.
I see value in offline storing of ACKs, as it
On 10 April 2015 at 13:01, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
On 9 April 2015 at 23:24, Ben Langfeld b...@langfeld.me wrote:
On 9 April 2015 at 16:58, Florian Schmaus f...@geekplace.eu wrote:
On 09.04.2015 18:59, Ben Langfeld wrote:
Florian, my concerns with your approach are twofold:
