Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: Explicit Mentions

On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 13:14:34 +0100
Philipp Hörist <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> This whole discussion about stripping characters is not relevant for
> interop. You can make a recommendation, but its clear that nobody
> will feel bound to it, as it is irrelevant for interop and this
> feature to work.
> 
> If the XEP makes a recommendation, it should have a sound rational.
> What would that be? Why is it important to you what different
> communities, clients or bridged networks choose as plaintext
> representation of a mention?

Well, my rationale for including the characters in the range is for
consistency across clients. If I receive a mention, I want to be
generally sure that all text related to the mention, including the
user's name and any extra processing characters, are contained solely
within the mention's range, and that I don't have to touch any other
part of the body to work with the mention. It won't break anything at a
protocol-level if ignored, sure, but making the receiver's life easier
still sounds like interop to me.

As for the recommendation to strip characters before sending, that's
mainly for interop with clients which still rely on implicit mentions.
Sending "@user" might interfere with a client which only expects
"user", and thus not notify a user that otherwise should've been.

Should I make these reasons more clear in the draft?
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]