Is there something planned to replace the removed "Attaching file to a post" part ? There was no clear explanation for this change.
Jaussoin Timothée 2012/5/22 Peter Saint-Andre <stpe...@stpeter.im> > On 5/22/12 12:40 PM, Sergey Dobrov wrote: > > On 05/23/2012 12:55 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > >> On 5/22/12 11:56 AM, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: > >>> Version 0.6 of XEP-0277 (Microblogging over XMPP) has been released. > >>> > >>> Abstract: This specification defines a method for microblogging over > >>> XMPP. > >>> > >>> Changelog: Added node configuration suggestions; removed file > >>> attachments; added rich content examples; change atom:content to > >>> atom:title anywhere in the document; invented the "Aggregator" > >>> entity; changed nodes metainformation locations; added possibility to > >>> add own content to repost. (snd) > >> > >> A few questions... > >> > >> What is a reasonable value for pubsub#max_items? > > To be clear, this is in reference to the section on microblog node > configuration: > > http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0277.html#microblog_node_config > > > It actually depends on server restrictions or user preferences. Maybe, > > it option is excess but ejabberd implementation (for example) has > > default value of 10 which is too small for such application and it can > > be dangerous not to warn developers about such thing. AFAIK, Jappix sets > > this value to something like 10-100 thousands of items which seems > > reasonable. > > Well, the need to *change* it from the default to some reasonable value > implies that the default value is unreasonable. That might depend on > implementation and deployment (e.g., if someone runs an XMPP interface > to an existing microblogging service, or a dedicated XMPP-based > microblogging service, then the defaults might be perfectly reasonable). > Thus I don't think the SHOULD is necessary here. It could say "verify > that the max items setting is reasonable for microblogging purposes and > change if necessary". > > >> Why change "pubsub#send_last_published_item" to "never"? > > > > Actually, just to prevent extra traffic from possible rich content of > > items. Can be omitted but I think that such things would be better to > > change on the client side but current Pubsub doesn't allow such > > interaction which is another problem. (I really wonder why such things > > as retractions delivery is set on a node level and not on client side). > > But I certainly might want to receive the last published item whenever I > log in. This too seems like a setting that a dedicated microblogging > service would tune in their configuration. > > >> I don't understand the special meaning of ItemID = zero for metadata. I > >> think there might be a better way to handle this. > > > > The meaning is just to provide easy way to obtain this very important > > data by just retrieving some magic constant named item. > > We usually try to avoid magic values. :) > > > It can be some > > more adjective string like "meta", actually, it doesn't really matter. > > But the main idea is to provide an ability to retrieve it quickly. For > > example, if I see a link to some comment for a some thread in generic > > pubsub service, I might be able to know which was the original post this > > comment related to and then I can just retrieve that metadata node and > > see and retrieve original post then. I don't want to create another > > pubsub node for metadata because this will make our data even more > sparse. > > > > Maybe, we can solve this using existing metadata pubsub feature but from > > my point of view it's not too useful to store such data. (fix me if I > > wrong) > > In XEP-0084, we had a dedicated metadata node: > > http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0084.html > > That spec is not so widely implemented, but the model seems fine. > > > P.S. thanks Peter for your review, I glad if some discussion will appear > > on the topic. > > Agreed. Anyone else? > > Peter > > -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ > > >
