Re: Resolve uncertainty about File Sharing Standards

Hi,

So can i read from your reply that you as council member do not agree that it is ready for a Last Call in its current state?
What about XEP-0447 and its dependencies?

Regards
Philipp

On Sun, Apr 5, 2026, at 00:08, Marvin W. via Standards wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> While I am all for gathering feedback, I'd like to remind that the purpose of a last call is to advance the status of the specification. Both XEPs can't be advanced without also advancing some other XEPs they depend on.
> 
> Specifically about XEP-0385, I'd like to point out that for what I know, the specification diverts from what is implemented in the wild and from the examples in itself: The normative text does not describe the XEP-0372 <reference> container element around the XEP-0385 <media-sharing> and even the references inside the XEP-0385 <sources> element are not described in the normative part to use XEP-0372.
> 
> While implementations (for what I know) do mandate the <reference> element around the <media-sharing> they often don't support the begin/end attribute shown in the example. Some implementations do allow the uri attribute of the XEP-0372 <reference> to be set and will interpret it as a download source for the file. Many (all?) implementations only support a single source uri and many (all?) don't support the XEP-0358 file retrieval defined in XEP-0385. Some implementation will even support no uri being present on either the outer <reference> or the <reference> inside <sources> for as long as an appropriate oob tag is present. Finally, it is unclear if sending multiple media files within a single message is intended to be supported by XEP-0385, but if it is (which I personally would have assumed, based on being able to have <reference> begin/end attributes for multiple parts of the message body), I doubt that implementations do have support for it.
> 
> Marvin
> 
> On Sat, 2026-04-04 at 23:15 +0200, Philipp Hörist wrote:
>> Dear Council Members,
>> 
>> For years now we have two competing standards https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0447.html and https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0385.html and it leads to confusion and additional work for new implementers and prevents in some cases implementations at all.
>> 
>> According to the xmpp.org page both XEPs have each 6 implementations.
>> 
>> I would suggest to issue a last call to gather feedback.
>> After all feedback is addressed council should advances only one.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Philipp
>> _______________________________________________
>> Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>

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