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

Info about aggregations not being required is outdated #1262

Closed
zecakeh opened this issue Oct 1, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

Info about aggregations not being required is outdated #1262

zecakeh opened this issue Oct 1, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit

Comments

@zecakeh
Copy link
Contributor

zecakeh commented Oct 1, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Link to problem area: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.4/client-server-api/#aggregations

Issue
This is the content of the info box:

This specification does not currently describe any rel_types which require aggregation. This functionality forms a framework for future extensions.

Which is not true anymore with the threads and event replacements added in v1.4.

I would have opened a PR directly to remove it but I'm not sure if it should instead be replaced by links to the corresponding sections of the spec for the different rel_types, or something else.
@zecakeh zecakeh added the clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit label Oct 1, 2022
@turt2live
Copy link
Member

the intent was to delete the info box - good catch!

@zecakeh zecakeh mentioned this issue Oct 2, 2022
Merged
@zecakeh
Copy link
Contributor Author

zecakeh commented Oct 4, 2022

Fixed with #1263

@zecakeh zecakeh closed this as completed Oct 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@turt2live @zecakeh