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.

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

Add read receipts to the example /sync response (SPEC-262) #120

Closed
matrixbot opened this issue Nov 3, 2015 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1341
Closed

Add read receipts to the example /sync response (SPEC-262) #120

matrixbot opened this issue Nov 3, 2015 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1341
Labels
A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit

Comments

@matrixbot
Copy link
Member

Submitted by @​irc_Arathorn:openmarket.com

(Imported from https://matrix.org/jira/browse/SPEC-262)

@matrixbot matrixbot changed the title Add read receipts to the example /sync response Add read receipts to the example /sync response (SPEC-262) Oct 31, 2016
@matrixbot matrixbot added the spec-bug Something which is in the spec, but is wrong label Nov 7, 2016
@turt2live turt2live added clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit and removed spec-bug Something which is in the spec, but is wrong labels Aug 7, 2018
@turt2live turt2live added the A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API label Sep 6, 2018
@richvdh richvdh transferred this issue from matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals Mar 1, 2022
dbkr added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 15, 2022
clokep pushed a commit to clokep/matrix-spec that referenced this issue May 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants