On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/16/11 11:09 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On 12/16/11 9:09 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>>> On 12/16/11 1:23 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> In a non-anonymous room, the 'from' attribute of a discussion history >>>>>> message SHOULD be the full JID of the original sender. In a >>>>>> semi-anonymous room, the 'from' attribute MUST be set to the JID of the >>>>>> room itself. >>>>> >>>>> I think we have discussed (and I think had consensus) that the from >>>>> should be stamped with the entity doing the delay stamping, and that >>>>> we should add an element to the stanza to tell you who the originator >>>>> was (where anonymity permits). >>>>> >>>>> In the unlikely event that I dreamed this, I propose the above. >>>> >>>> Yes, I recall discussion about that, too. Let me check the interim >>>> version of XEP-0045 to confirm. >>> >>> Changed in my working copy to: >>> >>> Discussion history messages MUST be stamped with Delayed Delivery >>> [14] information qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:delay' namespace to >>> indicate that they are sent with delayed delivery and to specify the >>> times at which they were originally sent. The 'from' attribute MUST >>> be set to the JID of the room itself. >> >> Great, thanks. >> >> Do we want to add another element giving the original JID? > > Not needed, methinks. The XML looks like this: > > <message > from='[email protected]/firstwitch' > id='162BEBB1-F6DB-4D9A-9BD8-CFDCC801A0B2' > to='[email protected]/broom' > type='groupchat'> > <body>Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.</body> > <delay xmlns='urn:xmpp:delay' > from='[email protected]' > stamp='2002-10-13T23:58:37Z'/> > </message> > > Do you mean the original real JID, not occupant JID?
I do - to replicate the previous case where the stamping of the delay told us that. /K
