Track: Question: template-msc number for Reply (not in thread)?

[Benjamin-Loison]

See matrix-commander/issues/160.

matrix-commander/blob/078da5f16c9b94893939ad19a21677f84a8625f9/tests/test-event.sh

matrix-commander/blob/078da5f16c9b94893939ad19a21677f84a8625f9/tests/test-event.sh#L57

matrix-commander/tree/078da5f16c9b94893939ad19a21677f84a8625f9/event-templates

In fact adding a template for Reply is not as easy as matrix-commander/blob/078da5f16c9b94893939ad19a21677f84a8625f9/event-templates/template-msc3440-thread.json.

According to Element desktop:

The former requires the following parameters:

• user identifier
• initial message text
• answer message
• room id
• initial message id

While we would have expected:

• answer message
• initial message id

Furthermore, In reply to is hardcoded despite the languages of other conversation members.

grep -rwl 'in_reply_to' -m 1

proposals/3952-intentional-mentions.md
proposals/3676-transitioning-away-from-reply-fallbacks.md
proposals/2674-event-relationships.md
proposals/2676-message-editing.md
proposals/3440-threading-via-relations.md

Assuming that matrix-commander/tree/078da5f16c9b94893939ad19a21677f84a8625f9/event-templates are specific to a given proposal, then only the first 3 proposals seem relevant. Actually only the second seems quite relevant but in fact it is does not seem to introduce in_reply_to, it is still unclear what template-msc number would be appropriate.

I hope that a dedicated proposal will be published for Matrix to support replying to a message without having to provide redundant fields.