Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: Explicit Mentions

> On 31 Mar 2026, at 09:57, Goffi <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Le mardi 24 mars 2026, 15:55:41 heure d’été d’Europe centrale Goffi a écrit :
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Le mardi 10 mars 2026, 15:28:26 heure normale d’Europe centrale Daniel 
> Gultsch 
>> a écrit :
>>> The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP.
>>> URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/explicit-mentions.html
>> 
>> What bother me a bit here, is that everything happens for people already in 
>> the MUC.
>> 
>> One of the major thing I want to be able to do with mentions, is mentioning 
>> people outside of a room. So I can be in many rooms without being actively 
>> present there and receiving all messages, I may want just to check them when 
>> I'm mentioned.
>> 
>> Another thing, is that this specification is chat only. So what do we do for 
>> pubsub mentions? Do we need another spec?
>> 
>> Mentions from XEP-0372 handle both cases. So what is the plan? Replace 
>> XEP-0372 by this? Use both in parallel? Extend with other XEPs?
>> 
>> As a side note, I agree with Marvin that is should be at least 2 specs (one 
>> for Markup [XEP-0394] and one for message importance). And with the general 
>> complexity of the current version, maybe more.
>> 
>> I like the general idea of being able to mention by affiliation of hats.
>> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> Goffi
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I didn't get any feedback, but with my council hat, this is important to know 
> the whole picture before casting my vote.
> 
> To be clear: I'm sympathetic to specification, and grateful to the work done in 
> this contribution. However, some parts are redundant with XEP-0372.
> 
> I've thought a bit about it, and I actually think that both use cases are 
> necessary:
> 
> - explicit mentions are more efficient for people already in the MUC, as there 
> is not extra message, and they can specify who is mentioned.
> 
> - I think that it's necessary to be able to mention people not in the room, or 
> sort of "registered" to a room, but not present at the time of the mention. In 
> this case, the MUC service could use XEP-0372 to mention them.
> Not being physically present in a room and receiving mention can have huge 
> benefits when following large room.
> 
> - XEP-0372 can also be used with Pubsub, which is, with my client developer 
> hat, a very important feature to me.
> 
> So there is room for both. However, there should not be 2 different ways of 
> marking the location of the mention, it should use XEP-0372 (maybe an updated 
> version of it) and made compatible with XEP-0394 (without making XEP-0394 
> mandatory).
> 
> All of that is not blocking to go to experimental and have an official number, 
> but if time flies and people start to implement, it's important to have those 
> concerns addressed as fast as possible.
> 
> I would really appreciate to have some feedback here before our meeting this 
> afternoon if possible (BTW, time has changed in many countries, so local 
> meeting time may be different for anybody willing to attend).

I think I agree with Goffi.

/K

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]