Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: New MUC

Hi,

> Is that referring to clients and servers still relying on resourceprep 
> when the RFC is clear that resource is a PRECIS OpaqueString
Is that supposed to allow all emojis? If the lib I use says 🎉 is 
forbidden, is it because it does resourceprep instead of doing PRECIS? 🚓
> (which has almost no limitations other than forbidding control 
> characters, which seems sensible for nicknames).
I am not saying we should, but FWIW discord and telegram (maybe other 
networks too) do allow control characters in nicknames.
> XEP-0172 MUC support removed in version 1.1 of that XEP but still used 
> in the wild by some clients, notably Jitsi Meet)

Some other implementations I know of that use XEP-0172:

- Cheogram <https://wiki.soprani.ca/CheogramApp/Nickname>
- Slidge (compatible with Cheogram to encode nicknames that are not 
valid resource parts — at least according to the libs I have used, cf above)
- Maybe gajim some day if I ever find the energy to rebase and finish 
<https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim/-/merge_requests/999>

Now, the question that has been burning my lips: is "New MUC" the new 
codename of "GC3" or are those supposed to be different things?

-- nicoco

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