> it's difficult to know exactly what the original intention was for this.
After indulging in archeology, it appears that 'acknowledged' was part of a solution to the problem of "End to End Acknowledgements" in [1]; specifically, "This confirms that the message has been read by the recipient, and requires manual action by the recipient" and "… useful where it is critical that the recipient gets a specific message (e.g., an order to do something). They would be very awkward if used for large numbers of messages, so this needs to be an option reserved for messages where it is critical to be certain that the message has been read." (The document talks of 'Read Receipts' but I understand this to mean "explicit manual message acknowledgement" rather than XEP-0184 style receipts, which the documents calls 'Delivery Reports.') So it seems the intention was to have a mechanism for a user to press a button/icon for a specific message to indicate purposeful acknowledgment by a human recipient. As it's only necessary to acknowledge specific messages, the 'up-to-here' semantics of markers seems a little out of place (something Kev also brought up [2]). [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20161010222602/http://www.isode.com/whitepapers/reliable-xmpp.html [2] https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2013-July/027731.html
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
