On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support querying for an
> archive similar to how it's done with XEP-0313.
>
> tl;dr Can querying archives on non-own, non-MUC, non-pubsub JID for
> 1:1 chats be standardized? Can
On Mittwoch, 26. Februar 2020 16:40:06 CET Ivan Vučica wrote:
> (Also, random thought: seeing XEP-0313 lapse into 'Deferred' is
> concerning...)
Actually, XEP-0313 is on the Council’s Short List for Last Call issuing (the
step which leads to advancement to Draft). And as Paul says, indeed,
> (Also, random thought: seeing XEP-0313 lapse into 'Deferred' is concerning...)
The deferred state doesn't really have any meaning, only that there was no
input on the XEP for over a year.
Paul
26.02.2020 16:41:06 Ivan Vučica :
> Hi,
>
> Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support
Hi,
Sometimes, protocols backing transports may support querying for an
archive similar to how it's done with XEP-0313.
tl;dr Can querying archives on non-own, non-MUC, non-pubsub JID for
1:1 chats be standardized? Can it be standardized that server
implementations don't have to support
пт, 21 февр. 2020 г. в 14:33, JC Brand :
> I have worked on deployments where Converse.js is integrated together with
> roster and presences and/or MUC presences and where pages are regularly
> reloaded (i.e. not a single-page app).
Btw, I assume you use a strophe.js library. Personally, I
сб, 22 февр. 2020 г. в 14:49, Jonas Schäfer :
> Instead of dropping SM and introducing explicit versioning protocols
> everywhere, wouldn’t it make more sense to increase SM timeouts to something
> useful for mobile clients?
Versioned protocols have one more crucial advantage, that comes as a
To now overcrowd the discussion, I'll answer severals email in this one.
пт, 21 февр. 2020 г. в 13:25, Daniel Gultsch :
> Only someone who hasn't been on a German high speed train can say with
> confidence that desktop and web clients don't need stream management.
This clearly looks like a
