On 2014-03-05 12:48, Winfried Tilanus wrote:
> [..]
> Well, I *assumed* your MUC implementation did not support this.
>
> Assuming that, you can try to change your MUC implementation (leaving
> alone the question if a change to XEP-0045 is needed). But when you have
> to change your MUC implement
occupant.
Christian
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 12:31 Uhr
Von: "Peter Saint-Andre"
An: "XMPP Standards"
Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?
On 3/5/14, 11:25 AM, Christian Schudt wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Could you elaborate a bit on the use case and the nee
On 05-03-14 11:46, Ralph Meijer wrote:
Hi,
>> could you elaborate on this proposal a little bit, please?
> Agreed. I'm a more of a fan of publish-subscribe than the next guy,
> but I don't see how this is a helpful suggestion without
> elaboration.
OK
>>> It would be so much easier to just allo
On 3/5/14, 11:25 AM, Christian Schudt wrote:
Hi,
Could you elaborate a bit on the use case and the need for it? I'm not
saying it's bad or irrelevant, but XEP-0045 was not designed to solve
every possible problem related to groupchat.
A user creates a (members-only) room and adds X contacts f
my webmail interface (GMX) does not allow for those ">"
quotes (afaik). I did it manually now.
Christian
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 11:35 Uhr
Von: "Peter Saint-Andre"
An: "XMPP Standards"
Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?
:)
A: Because it
On 2014-03-05 11:16, Christian Schudt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> could you elaborate on this proposal a little bit, please?
Agreed. I'm a more of a fan of publish-subscribe than the next guy, but
I don't see how this is a helpful suggestion without elaboration.
Going back to the original question, I don't
s about occupants who are already in the room.)
Peter
Christian
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 05. März 2014 um 10:54 Uhr
Von: "Winfried Tilanus"
An: standards@xmpp.org
Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?
On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote:
Hi,
I recently was confronted with
ndards@xmpp.org
Betreff: Re: [Standards] XEP-0045 to Final?
On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote:
Hi,
> I recently was confronted with the following requirement: Create a
> (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and
> send an invitation to these X contacts.
>
On 01-03-14 18:04, Christian Schudt wrote:
Hi,
> I recently was confronted with the following requirement: Create a
> (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and
> send an invitation to these X contacts.
>
> Then after receiving the invitation, but BEFORE joining the room,
Hi,
I recently was confronted with the following requirement:
Create a (non-public members-only) room, grant membership to X contacts and
send an invitation to these X contacts.
Then after receiving the invitation, but BEFORE joining the room, the invitee
should discover the members in the room
I would like to propose that we advance XEP-0045 to Final. The spec
advanced to Draft in 2002, it is widely implemented, and it is quite
stable. I plan to query the XMPP Council about issuing a Call for
Experience (see XEP-0001) in its next meeting.
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.
11 matches
Mail list logo