That makes sense, thanks. I'll think about how the examples can be
clarified going forward.
—Sam
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, at 16:18, Kim Alvefur wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 03:17:04PM +, Sam Whited wrote:
> >I'm not actually sure what this means, do you have more specific
> >feedback about t
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 03:17:04PM +, Sam Whited wrote:
I'm not actually sure what this means, do you have more specific
feedback about the XEP that I can fix? Thanks!
Mostly that I had trouble understanding who was sending what in the
various examples. I'm sure this can be fixed during Exp
I'm not actually sure what this means, do you have more specific
feedback about the XEP that I can fix? Thanks!
—Sam
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, at 14:55, Kim Alvefur wrote:
> With the number of entities that can be involved in multiplexing it
> can quickly become confusing and hard to keep track of ev
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 09:18:35PM +, Tedd Sterr wrote:
https://logs.xmpp.org/council/2020-12-09?p=h#2020-12-09-b1b9c3afef6268d5
4) Proposed XMPP Extension: Stanza Multiplexing -
https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/mux.html
Zash: [on-list]
+1
With the number of entities that can be involved
