Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

MSC3124: Handling spoilers in plain-text message fallback #3124

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: old_master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

MSC3124: Handling spoilers in plain-text message fallback #3124

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

xenofem
Copy link

@xenofem xenofem commented Apr 15, 2021

@xenofem
MSC3124: Representing spoilers in plain-text message fallback
320b05e 
Signed-off-by: xenofem <xenofem@xeno.science>
@xenofem
Copy link
Author

xenofem commented Apr 15, 2021

This addresses matrix-org/matrix-spec#808.

@turt2live turt2live added client-server Client-Server API kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec proposal A matrix spec change proposal proposal-in-review labels Apr 15, 2021
@xenofem
revise MSC based on discussion in #matrix-spec
f43b927 
Signed-off-by: xenofem <xenofem@xeno.science>
@xenofem xenofem changed the title MSC3124: Representing spoilers in plain-text message fallback MSC3124: Handling spoilers in plain-text message fallback Apr 15, 2021
@xenofem
Copy link
Author

xenofem commented Apr 15, 2021

Following a discussion in #matrix-spec:matrix.org, I've revised this MSC to put responsibility on receiving clients to handle spoilers safely; it's been rightly pointed out that the MSC as originally drafted is unenforceable, so it isn't safe for clients to assume that other clients are compliant. The MSC still addresses matrix-org/matrix-spec#808 , but no longer makes any specific suggestions on how to obfuscate spoilers in fallback, since this obfuscation is not useful to receiving clients without a way to guarantee obfuscation is always being performed by all sending clients.

@xenofem xenofem mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2021
Open
@turt2live turt2live added the needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. label Jun 8, 2021
@OpaqueReptile OpaqueReptile mentioned this pull request Nov 7, 2021
Merged
9 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
client-server Client-Server API kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. proposal A matrix spec change proposal
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@xenofem @turt2live