From aab2d587f31bc74f6f29827604036696bf61e275 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philipp Emanuel Weidmann Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:05:21 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Fix spelling and grammar issues Signed-off-by: Philipp Emanuel Weidmann --- .../appendices/identifier_grammar.rst | 12 ++--- specification/appendices/signing_json.rst | 4 +- specification/appendices/threat_model.rst | 2 +- specification/application_service_api.rst | 6 +-- specification/client_server_api.rst | 38 ++++++++-------- specification/identity_service_api.rst | 4 +- specification/index.rst | 2 +- .../modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst | 44 +++++++++---------- specification/proposals_intro.rst | 30 ++++++------- specification/server_server_api.rst | 14 +++--- 10 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) diff --git a/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst b/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst index 95c22fb1..d9e56714 100644 --- a/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst +++ b/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ The complete grammar for a legal user ID is:: set. User IDs are primarily intended for use as an identifier at the protocol level, and their use as a human-readable handle is of secondary benefit. Furthermore, they are useful as a last-resort differentiator between - users with similar display names. Allowing the full unicode character set + users with similar display names. Allowing the full Unicode character set would make very difficult for a human to distinguish two similar user IDs. The limited character set used has the advantage that even a user unfamiliar with the Latin alphabet should be able to distinguish similar user IDs manually, if @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ history includes events with a ``sender`` which does not conform. In order to handle these rooms successfully, clients and servers MUST accept user IDs with localparts from the expanded character set:: - extended_user_id_char = %x21-39 / %x3B-7E ; all ascii printing chars except : + extended_user_id_char = %x21-39 / %x3B-7E ; all ASCII printing chars except : Mapping from other character sets <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< @@ -251,8 +251,8 @@ risk of clashes of identifiers between different homeservers. There is no implication that the room or event in question is still available at the corresponding homeserver. -Event IDs and Room IDs are case-sensitive. They are not meant to be human -readable. They are intended to be treated as fully opaque strings by clients. +Event IDs and Room IDs are case-sensitive. They are not meant to be human-readable. +They are intended to be treated as fully opaque strings by clients. .. TODO-spec What is the grammar for the opaque part? https://matrix.org/jira/browse/SPEC-389 @@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ parameter is only used in the case of permalinks where an event ID is referenced The matrix.to URI, when referenced, must always start with ``https://matrix.to/#/`` followed by the identifier. -The ```` and the preceeding question mark are optional and +The ```` and the preceding question mark are optional and only apply in certain circumstances, documented below. Clients should not rely on matrix.to URIs falling back to a web server if accessed @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ are picked is left as an implementation detail, however the current recommendati to pick 3 unique servers based on the following criteria: * The first server should be the server of the highest power level user in the room, - provided they are at least power level 50. If no user meets this criteria, pick the + provided they are at least power level 50. If no user meets these criteria, pick the most popular server in the room (most joined users). The rationale for not picking users with power levels under 50 is that they are unlikely to be around into the distant future while higher ranking users (and therefore servers) are less likely diff --git a/specification/appendices/signing_json.rst b/specification/appendices/signing_json.rst index fbeb0010..1bc99180 100644 --- a/specification/appendices/signing_json.rst +++ b/specification/appendices/signing_json.rst @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Canonical JSON ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We define the canonical JSON encoding for a value to be the shortest UTF-8 JSON -encoding with dictionary keys lexicographically sorted by unicode codepoint. +encoding with dictionary keys lexicographically sorted by Unicode codepoint. Numbers in the JSON must be integers in the range ``[-(2**53)+1, (2**53)-1]``. We pick UTF-8 as the encoding as it should be available to all platforms and @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ using this representation. separators=(',',':'), # Sort the keys of dictionaries. sort_keys=True, - # Encode the resulting unicode as UTF-8 bytes. + # Encode the resulting Unicode as UTF-8 bytes. ).encode("UTF-8") Grammar diff --git a/specification/appendices/threat_model.rst b/specification/appendices/threat_model.rst index 9ad5fef8..354e9240 100644 --- a/specification/appendices/threat_model.rst +++ b/specification/appendices/threat_model.rst @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ victim in order to: Threat: Resource Exhaustion +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -An attacker could cause the victims server to exhaust a particular resource +An attacker could cause the victim's server to exhaust a particular resource (e.g. open TCP connections, CPU, memory, disk storage) Threat: Unrecoverable Consistency Violations diff --git a/specification/application_service_api.rst b/specification/application_service_api.rst index 302f0980..4f386171 100644 --- a/specification/application_service_api.rst +++ b/specification/application_service_api.rst @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ Authorization Homeservers MUST include a query parameter named ``access_token`` containing the ``hs_token`` from the application service's registration when making requests to the application service. Application services MUST verify the provided ``access_token`` -matches their known ``hs_token``, failing the request with a ``M_FORBIDDEN`` error +matches their known ``hs_token``, failing the request with an ``M_FORBIDDEN`` error if it does not match. Legacy routes @@ -206,8 +206,8 @@ service specification now defines a version on all endpoints to be more compatib with the rest of the Matrix specification and the future. Homeservers should attempt to use the specified endpoints first when communicating -with application services. However, if the application service receives an http status -code that does not indicate success (ie: 404, 500, 501, etc) then the homeserver +with application services. However, if the application service receives an HTTP status +code that does not indicate success (i.e.: 404, 500, 501, etc) then the homeserver should fall back to the older endpoints for the application service. The older endpoints have the exact same request body and response format, they diff --git a/specification/client_server_api.rst b/specification/client_server_api.rst index a1f48910..8afd6d31 100644 --- a/specification/client_server_api.rst +++ b/specification/client_server_api.rst @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ Other error codes the client might encounter are: permits, for example, email addresses from a particular domain. :``M_SERVER_NOT_TRUSTED``: - The client's request used a third party server, eg. identity server, that this server does not trust. + The client's request used a third party server, e.g. identity server, that this server does not trust. :``M_UNSUPPORTED_ROOM_VERSION``: The client's request to create a room used a room version that the server does not support. @@ -228,8 +228,8 @@ Other error codes the client might encounter are: may reach a resource limit if it starts using too much memory or disk space. The error MUST have an ``admin_contact`` field to provide the user receiving the error a place to reach out to. Typically, this error will appear on routes which attempt - to modify state (eg: sending messages, account data, etc) and not routes which only - read state (eg: ``/sync``, get account data, etc). + to modify state (e.g.: sending messages, account data, etc) and not routes which only + read state (e.g.: ``/sync``, get account data, etc). :``M_CANNOT_LEAVE_SERVER_NOTICE_ROOM``: The user is unable to reject an invite to join the server notices room. See the @@ -266,8 +266,8 @@ to pre-flight requests and supply Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) headers o all requests. Servers MUST expect that clients will approach them with ``OPTIONS`` requests, -allowing clients to discover the CORS headers. All endpoints in this specification s -upport the ``OPTIONS`` method, however the server MUST NOT perform any logic defined +allowing clients to discover the CORS headers. All endpoints in this specification +support the ``OPTIONS`` method, however the server MUST NOT perform any logic defined for the endpoints when approached with an ``OPTIONS`` request. When a client approaches the server with a request, the server should respond with @@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ homeserver may provide many different ways of authenticating, such as user/password auth, login via a single-sign-on server (SSO), etc. This specification does not define how homeservers should authorise their users but instead defines the standard interface which implementations should follow so -that ANY client can login to ANY homeserver. +that ANY client can log in to ANY homeserver. The process takes the form of one or more 'stages'. At each stage the client submits a set of data for a given authentication type and awaits a response @@ -707,7 +707,7 @@ For example, to authenticate using the user's Matrix ID, clients would submit: } Alternatively reply using a 3PID bound to the user's account on the homeserver -using the |/account/3pid|_ API rather then giving the ``user`` explicitly as +using the |/account/3pid|_ API rather than giving the ``user`` explicitly as follows: .. code:: json @@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ Dummy Auth Dummy authentication always succeeds and requires no extra parameters. Its purpose is to allow servers to not require any form of User-Interactive Authentication to perform a request. It can also be used to differentiate - flows where otherwise one flow would be a subset of another flow. eg. if + flows where otherwise one flow would be a subset of another flow. e.g. if a server offers flows ``m.login.recaptcha`` and ``m.login.recaptcha, m.login.email.identity`` and the client completes the recaptcha stage first, the auth would succeed with the former flow, even if the client was intending @@ -878,7 +878,7 @@ to be defined in an embedded browser, or to use the HTML5 `cross-document messaging `_ API, to receive a notification that the authentication stage has been completed. -Once a client receives the notificaton that the authentication stage has been +Once a client receives the notification that the authentication stage has been completed, it should resubmit the request with an auth dict with just the session ID: @@ -891,19 +891,19 @@ session ID: Example <<<<<<< -A client webapp might use the following javascript to open a popup window which will +A client webapp might use the following JavaScript to open a popup window which will handle unknown login types: .. code:: javascript /** * Arguments: - * homeserverUrl: the base url of the homeserver (eg "https://matrix.org") + * homeserverUrl: the base url of the homeserver (e.g. "https://matrix.org") * - * apiEndpoint: the API endpoint being used (eg + * apiEndpoint: the API endpoint being used (e.g. * "/_matrix/client/%CLIENT_MAJOR_VERSION%/account/password") * - * loginType: the loginType being attempted (eg "m.login.recaptcha") + * loginType: the loginType being attempted (e.g. "m.login.recaptcha") * * sessionID: the session ID given by the homeserver in earlier requests * @@ -930,7 +930,7 @@ handle unknown login types: }; request({ - method:'POST', url:apiEndpint, json:requestBody, + method:'POST', url:apiEndpoint, json:requestBody, }, onComplete); }; @@ -1044,7 +1044,7 @@ request as follows: } Alternatively, a client can use a 3PID bound to the user's account on the -homeserver using the |/account/3pid|_ API rather then giving the ``user`` +homeserver using the |/account/3pid|_ API rather than giving the ``user`` explicitly, as follows: .. code:: json @@ -1130,7 +1130,7 @@ can be proxied (bound) to the identity server in many cases. This section deals with two terms: "add" and "bind". Where "add" (or "remove") is used, it is speaking about an identifier that was not bound to an identity server. As a result, "bind" (or "unbind") references an identifier that is found - in an identity server. Note that an identifer can be added and bound at the same + in an identity server. Note that an identifier can be added and bound at the same time, depending on context. {{administrative_contact_cs_http_api}} @@ -1745,7 +1745,7 @@ same way a server does. except those protected by the redaction algorithm. For example, a redacted ``join`` event will still result in the user being considered joined. Similarly, a redacted topic does not necessarily cause the topic to revert to - what is was prior to the event - it causes the topic to be removed from the room. + what it was prior to the event - it causes the topic to be removed from the room. Events @@ -1977,9 +1977,9 @@ many places of a client's display, changes to these fields cause an automatic propagation event to occur, informing likely-interested parties of the new values. This change is conveyed using two separate mechanisms: -- a ``m.room.member`` event (with a ``join`` membership) is sent to every room +- an ``m.room.member`` event (with a ``join`` membership) is sent to every room the user is a member of, to update the ``displayname`` and ``avatar_url``. -- a ``m.presence`` presence status update is sent, again containing the new +- an ``m.presence`` presence status update is sent, again containing the new values of the ``displayname`` and ``avatar_url`` keys, in addition to the required ``presence`` key containing the current presence state of the user. diff --git a/specification/identity_service_api.rst b/specification/identity_service_api.rst index 704f763e..b2446381 100644 --- a/specification/identity_service_api.rst +++ b/specification/identity_service_api.rst @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ Terms of service Identity Servers are encouraged to have terms of service (or similar policies) to ensure that users have agreed to their data being processed by the server. To facilitate -this, an identity server can respond to almost any authenticated API endpoint with a +this, an identity server can respond to almost any authenticated API endpoint with an HTTP 403 and the error code ``M_TERMS_NOT_SIGNED``. The error code is used to indicate that the user must accept new terms of service before being able to continue. @@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ i.e. I can claim that any email address I own is associated with Sessions are time-limited; a session is considered to have been modified when it was created, and then when a validation is performed within it. A session can only be checked for validation, and validation can only be performed within a -session, within a 24 hour period since its most recent modification. Any +session, within a 24-hour period since its most recent modification. Any attempts to perform these actions after the expiry will be rejected, and a new session should be created and used instead. diff --git a/specification/index.rst b/specification/index.rst index 4c256fc3..276ee8b2 100644 --- a/specification/index.rst +++ b/specification/index.rst @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ Profiles ~~~~~~~~ Users may publish arbitrary key/value data associated with their account - such -as a human readable display name, a profile photo URL, contact information +as a human-readable display name, a profile photo URL, contact information (email address, phone numbers, website URLs etc). .. TODO diff --git a/specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst b/specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst index be66897b..6aa5eb1b 100644 --- a/specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst +++ b/specification/modules/end_to_end_encryption.rst @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ Base64`_. Example: "JGLn/yafz74HB2AbPLYJWIVGnKAtqECOBf11yyXac2Y" The name ``signed_curve25519`` also corresponds to the Curve25519 algorithm, -but a key using this algorithm is represented by an object with a the following +but a key using this algorithm is represented by an object with the following properties: ``KeyObject`` @@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ Device verification may reach one of several conclusions. For example: Key verification framework ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -Verifying keys manually by reading out the Ed25519 key is not very user friendly, +Verifying keys manually by reading out the Ed25519 key is not very user-friendly, and can lead to errors. In order to help mitigate errors, and to make the process easier for users, some verification methods are supported by the specification. The methods all use a common framework for negotiating the key verification. @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ allows Bob to reject the request on one device, and have it apply to all of his devices. Similarly, it allows Bob to process the verification on one device without having to involve all of his devices. -When Bob's device receives a ``m.key.verification.request``, it should prompt Bob +When Bob's device receives an ``m.key.verification.request``, it should prompt Bob to verify keys with Alice using one of the supported methods in the request. If Bob's device does not understand any of the methods, it should not cancel the request as one of his other devices may support the request. Instead, Bob's device should @@ -454,17 +454,17 @@ minutes after Bob's client receives the message, whichever comes first, if Bob does not interact with the prompt. The prompt should additionally be hidden if an appropriate ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message is received. -If Bob rejects the request, Bob's client must send a ``m.key.verification.cancel`` +If Bob rejects the request, Bob's client must send an ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to Alice's device. Upon receipt, Alice's device should tell her that Bob does not want to verify her device and send ``m.key.verification.cancel`` messages to all of Bob's devices to notify them that the request was rejected. If Bob accepts the request, Bob's device starts the key verification process by -sending a ``m.key.verification.start`` message to Alice's device. Upon receipt -of this message, Alice's device should send a ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message +sending an ``m.key.verification.start`` message to Alice's device. Upon receipt +of this message, Alice's device should send an ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to all of Bob's other devices to indicate the process has been started. The start message must use the same ``transaction_id`` from the original key verification -request if it is in response to the request. The start message can be sent indepdently +request if it is in response to the request. The start message can be sent independently of any request. Individual verification methods may add additional steps, events, and properties to @@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ be under the ``m.key.verification`` namespace and any other event types must be according to the Java package naming convention. Any of Alice's or Bob's devices can cancel the key verification request or process -at any time with a ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to all applicable devices. +at any time with an ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to all applicable devices. This framework yields the following handshake, assuming both Alice and Bob each have 2 devices, Bob's first device accepts the key verification request, and Alice's second @@ -516,7 +516,7 @@ Short Authentication String (SAS) verification SAS verification is a user-friendly key verification process built off the common framework outlined above. SAS verification is intended to be a highly interactive -process for users, and as such exposes verfiication methods which are easier for +process for users, and as such exposes verification methods which are easier for users to use. The verification process is heavily inspired by Phil Zimmermann's ZRTP key agreement @@ -553,17 +553,17 @@ The process between Alice and Bob verifying each other would be: #. Alice and Bob communicate which devices they'd like to verify with each other. #. Alice selects Bob's device from the device list and begins verification. #. Alice's client ensures it has a copy of Bob's device key. -#. Alice's device sends Bob's device a ``m.key.verification.start`` message. +#. Alice's device sends Bob's device an ``m.key.verification.start`` message. #. Bob's device receives the message and selects a key agreement protocol, hash algorithm, message authentication code, and SAS method supported by Alice's device. #. Bob's device ensures it has a copy of Alice's device key. #. Bob's device creates an ephemeral Curve25519 key pair (|BobCurve25519|), and calculates the hash (using the chosen algorithm) of the public key |BobPublicKey|. -#. Bob's device replies to Alice's device with a ``m.key.verification.accept`` message. +#. Bob's device replies to Alice's device with an ``m.key.verification.accept`` message. #. Alice's device receives Bob's message and stores the commitment hash for later use. #. Alice's device creates an ephemeral Curve25519 key pair (|AliceCurve25519|) and - replies to Bob's device with a ``m.key.verification.key``, sending only the public + replies to Bob's device with an ``m.key.verification.key``, sending only the public key |AlicePublicKey|. #. Bob's device receives Alice's message and replies with its own ``m.key.verification.key`` message containing its public key |BobPublicKey|. @@ -578,11 +578,11 @@ The process between Alice and Bob verifying each other would be: #. Alice and Bob compare the strings shown by their devices, and tell their devices if they match or not. #. Assuming they match, Alice and Bob's devices calculate the HMAC of their own device keys - and a comma-separated sorted list of of the key IDs that they wish the other user + and a comma-separated sorted list of the key IDs that they wish the other user to verify, using SHA-256 as the hash function. HMAC is defined in `RFC 2104 `_. The key for the HMAC is different for each item and is calculated by generating 32 bytes (256 bits) using `the key verification HKDF <#sas-hkdf>`_. -#. Alice's device sends Bob's device a ``m.key.verification.mac`` message containing the +#. Alice's device sends Bob's device an ``m.key.verification.mac`` message containing the MAC of Alice's device keys and the MAC of her key IDs to be verified. Bob's device does the same for Bob's device keys and key IDs concurrently with Alice. #. When the other device receives the ``m.key.verification.mac`` message, the device @@ -619,20 +619,20 @@ The wire protocol looks like the following between Alice and Bob's devices:: Error and exception handling <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< -At any point the interactive verfication can go wrong. The following describes what +At any point the interactive verification can go wrong. The following describes what to do when an error happens: -* Alice or Bob can cancel the verification at any time. A ``m.key.verification.cancel`` +* Alice or Bob can cancel the verification at any time. An ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message must be sent to signify the cancellation. * The verification can time out. Clients should time out a verification that does not complete within 10 minutes. Additionally, clients should expire a ``transaction_id`` which goes unused for 10 minutes after having last sent/received it. The client should inform the user that the verification timed out, and send an appropriate ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to the other device. -* When the same device attempts to intiate multiple verification attempts, the receipient +* When the same device attempts to initiate multiple verification attempts, the recipient should cancel all attempts with that device. * When a device receives an unknown ``transaction_id``, it should send an appropriate - ``m.key.verfication.cancel`` message to the other device indicating as such. This + ``m.key.verification.cancel`` message to the other device indicating as such. This does not apply for inbound ``m.key.verification.start`` or ``m.key.verification.cancel`` messages. * If the two devices do not share a common key share, hash, HMAC, or SAS method then @@ -1169,7 +1169,7 @@ session has become corrupted and create a new one to replace it. to decrypt it successfully. Olm does not have a way to recover from the failure, making this session replacement process required. -To establish a new session, the client sends a `m.dummy <#m-dummy>`_ to-device event +To establish a new session, the client sends an `m.dummy <#m-dummy>`_ to-device event to the other party to notify them of the new session details. Clients should rate-limit the number of sessions it creates per device that it receives @@ -1232,13 +1232,13 @@ who sent the message. The same reasoning applies, but the sender ed25519 key has inferred from the ``keys.ed25519`` property of the event which established the Megolm session. -In order to enable end-to-end encryption in a room, clients can send a +In order to enable end-to-end encryption in a room, clients can send an ``m.room.encryption`` state event specifying ``m.megolm.v1.aes-sha2`` as its ``algorithm`` property. When creating a Megolm session in a room, clients must share the corresponding session key using Olm with the intended recipients, so that they can decrypt future messages -encrypted using this session. A ``m.room_key`` event is used to do this. Clients +encrypted using this session. An ``m.room_key`` event is used to do this. Clients must also handle ``m.room_key`` events sent by other devices in order to decrypt their messages. @@ -1275,7 +1275,7 @@ Extensions to /sync This module adds an optional ``device_lists`` property to the |/sync|_ response, as specified below. The server need only populate this property for -an incremental ``/sync`` (ie, one where the ``since`` parameter was +an incremental ``/sync`` (i.e., one where the ``since`` parameter was specified). The client is expected to use |/keys/query|_ or |/keys/changes|_ for the equivalent functionality after an initial sync, as documented in `Tracking the device list for a user`_. diff --git a/specification/proposals_intro.rst b/specification/proposals_intro.rst index 6d8dc8a9..a54f7bca 100644 --- a/specification/proposals_intro.rst +++ b/specification/proposals_intro.rst @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ As a worked example: 1. Video conferencing is clearly a feature which would benefit the whole ecosystem, and so the spec should find a way to make it happen. 2. Video conferencing can be achieved by widgets without requiring any - compulsory changes to changes to clients nor servers to work, and so could be + compulsory changes to clients nor servers to work, and so could be omitted from the spec. 3. A better experience could be achieved by embedding Jitsi natively into clients rather than using a widget... @@ -145,10 +145,10 @@ for doing so), or to keep it as a widget-based approach (optionally with widget extensions specific for more deeply integrating video conferencing use cases). As an alternative example: it's very unlikely that "how to visualise Magnetic -Resonsance Imaging data over Matrix" would ever be added to the Matrix spec +Resonance Imaging data over Matrix" would ever be added to the Matrix spec (other than perhaps a custom event type in a wider standardised Matrix event registry) given that the spec's existing primitives of file transfer and -extensible events (MSC1767) give excellent tools for transfering and +extensible events (MSC1767) give excellent tools for transferring and visualising arbitrary rich data. Supporting public search engines are likely to not require custom spec features @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ Process The process for submitting a Matrix Spec Change (MSC) Proposal in detail is as follows: -- Create a first draft of your proposal using `GitHub-flavored markdown +- Create a first draft of your proposal using `GitHub-flavored Markdown `_ - In the document, clearly state the problem being solved, and the possible @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ follows: - The proposal must live in the ``proposals/`` directory with a filename that follows the format ``1234-my-new-proposal.md`` where ``1234`` is the MSC ID. - - Your PR description must include a link to the rendered markdown document + - Your PR description must include a link to the rendered Markdown document and a summary of the proposal. - It is often very helpful to link any related MSCs or `matrix-doc issues `_ to give context @@ -209,10 +209,10 @@ follows: If preferred, an alternative room can be created and advertised in #matrix-spec:matrix.org. Please also link to the room in your PR description. - - For additional discussion areas, know that that #matrix-dev:matrix.org is + - For additional discussion areas, know that #matrix-dev:matrix.org is for developers using existing Matrix APIs, #matrix:matrix.org is for users trying to run Matrix apps (clients & servers) and - #matrix-architecture:matrix.org is for cross-cutting discussion of matrix's + #matrix-architecture:matrix.org is for cross-cutting discussion of Matrix's architectural design. - The point of the spec proposal process is to be collaborative rather than competitive, and to try to solve the problem in question with the optimal @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ follows: the current state of the discussion, along with reasoning for its occurrence. - A concern can be raised by a Spec Core Team member at any time, which will block an FCP from beginning. An FCP will only begin when 75% of the members of the - Spec Core Team team agree on its outcome, and all existing concerns have been + Spec Core Team agree on its outcome, and all existing concerns have been resolved. - The FCP will then begin and last for 5 days, giving anyone else some time to speak up before it concludes. On its conclusion, the disposition of the FCP @@ -332,7 +332,7 @@ Proposal Drafting and Feedback N/A A proposal docum Proposal In Review proposal-in-review A proposal document which is now ready and waiting for review by the Spec Core Team and community Proposed Final Comment Period proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of a 75% majority of team members in order to enter the final comment period Final Comment Period final-comment-period A proposal document which has reached final comment period either for merge, closure or postponement -Final Commment Period Complete finished-final-comment-period The final comment period has been completed. Waiting for a demonstration implementation +Final Comment Period Complete finished-final-comment-period The final comment period has been completed. Waiting for a demonstration implementation Spec PR Missing spec-pr-missing The proposal has been agreed, and proven with a demonstration implementation. Waiting for a PR against the Spec Spec PR In Review spec-pr-in-review The spec PR has been written, and is currently under review Spec PR Merged merged A proposal with a sufficient working implementation and whose Spec PR has been merged! @@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ an effort to pull MSCs out of that category when possible. The current categories are: ============ ================= ====================================== -Name Github Label Description +Name GitHub Label Description ============ ================= ====================================== Core kind:core Important for the protocol's success. Feature kind:feature Nice to have additions to the spec. @@ -379,10 +379,10 @@ As part of the proposal process the spec core team will require evidence of the working in order for it to move into FCP. This can usually be a branch/pull request to whichever implementation of choice that proves the MSC works in practice, though in some cases the MSC itself will be small enough to be considered proven. Where it's -unclear if a MSC will require an implementation proof, ask in `#matrix-spec:matrix.org +unclear if an MSC will require an implementation proof, ask in `#matrix-spec:matrix.org `_. -Early release of a MSC/idea +Early release of an MSC/idea ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To help facilitate early releases of software dependent on a spec release, implementations @@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ is not cluttered with development or testing data. .. Note:: MSCs MUST still describe what the stable endpoints/feature looks like with a note towards the bottom for what the unstable feature flag/prefixes are. For example, - a MSC would propose `/_matrix/client/r0/new/endpoint`, not `/_matrix/client/unstable/ + an MSC would propose `/_matrix/client/r0/new/endpoint`, not `/_matrix/client/unstable/ com.example/new/endpoint`. In summary: @@ -488,7 +488,7 @@ resolve to the desired MSC, whether it started as an issue or a PR. Other metadata: - The MSC number is taken from the GitHub Pull Request ID. This is carried for - the lifetime of the proposal. These IDs do not necessary represent a + the lifetime of the proposal. These IDs do not necessarily represent a chronological order. - The GitHub PR title will act as the MSC's title. - Please link to the spec PR (if any) by adding a "PRs: #1234" line in the @@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ Other metadata: - The creation date is taken from the GitHub PR, but can be overridden by adding a "Date: yyyy-mm-dd" line in the PR description. - Updated Date is taken from GitHub. -- Author is the creator of the MSC PR, but can be overridden by adding a +- Author is the creator of the MSC PR, but can be overridden by adding an "Author: @username" line in the body of the issue description. Please make sure @username is a GitHub user (include the @!) - A shepherd can be assigned by adding a "Shepherd: @username" line in the diff --git a/specification/server_server_api.rst b/specification/server_server_api.rst index 9deb267c..5b143dbd 100644 --- a/specification/server_server_api.rst +++ b/specification/server_server_api.rst @@ -731,7 +731,7 @@ In summary, the remote join handshake consists of the joining server querying the directory server for information about the room alias; receiving a room ID and a list of join candidates. The joining server then requests information about the room from one of the residents. It uses this information to construct -a ``m.room.member`` event which it finally sends to a resident server. +an ``m.room.member`` event which it finally sends to a resident server. Conceptually these are three different roles of homeserver. In practice the directory server is likely to be resident in the room, and so may be selected @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ Similar to the `Joining Rooms`_ handshake, the server which wishes to leave the room starts with sending a ``/make_leave`` request to a resident server. In the case of rejecting invites, the resident server may be the server which sent the invite. After receiving a template event from ``/make_leave``, the leaving server -signs the event and replaces the ``event_id`` with it's own. This is then sent to +signs the event and replaces the ``event_id`` with its own. This is then sent to the resident server via ``/send_leave``. The resident server will then send the event to other servers in the room. @@ -837,7 +837,7 @@ Third-party invites More information about third party invites is available in the `Client-Server API`_ under the Third Party Invites module. -When an user wants to invite another user in a room but doesn't know the Matrix +When a user wants to invite another user in a room but doesn't know the Matrix ID to invite, they can do so using a third-party identifier (e.g. an e-mail or a phone number). @@ -856,7 +856,7 @@ Cases where an association doesn't exist for a third-party identifier If the third-party identifier isn't bound to any Matrix ID, the inviting homeserver will request the identity server to store an invite for this identifier -and to deliver it to whoever binds it to its Matrix ID. It will also send a +and to deliver it to whoever binds it to its Matrix ID. It will also send an ``m.room.third_party_invite`` event in the room to specify a display name, a token and public keys the identity server provided as a response to the invite storage request. @@ -867,7 +867,7 @@ in the `Invitation Storage`_ section of the Identity Service API. The following process applies for each invite sent by the identity server: -The invited homeserver will create a ``m.room.member`` invite event containing +The invited homeserver will create an ``m.room.member`` invite event containing a special ``third_party_invite`` section containing the token and a signed object, both provided by the identity server. @@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ will need to request the room's homeserver to auth the event. Verifying the invite ++++++++++++++++++++ -When a homeserver receives a ``m.room.member`` invite event for a room it's in +When a homeserver receives an ``m.room.member`` invite event for a room it's in with a ``third_party_invite`` object, it must verify that the association between the third-party identifier initially invited to the room and the Matrix ID that claims to be bound to it has been verified without having to rely on a third-party @@ -949,7 +949,7 @@ Receipts are EDUs used to communicate a marker for a given event. Currently the only kind of receipt supported is a "read receipt", or where in the event graph the user has read up to. -Read receipts for events events that a user sent do not need to be sent. It is +Read receipts for events that a user sent do not need to be sent. It is implied that by sending the event the user has read up to the event. {{definition_ss_event_schemas_m_receipt}} From 734be5165bd9ddddf1d5d86e6fdf55a93800e561 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Travis Ralston Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:46:11 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Kitsune Ral --- specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst | 2 +- specification/proposals_intro.rst | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst b/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst index d9e56714..f8b2aef5 100644 --- a/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst +++ b/specification/appendices/identifier_grammar.rst @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ are picked is left as an implementation detail, however the current recommendati to pick 3 unique servers based on the following criteria: * The first server should be the server of the highest power level user in the room, - provided they are at least power level 50. If no user meets these criteria, pick the + provided they are at least power level 50. If no user meets this criterion, pick the most popular server in the room (most joined users). The rationale for not picking users with power levels under 50 is that they are unlikely to be around into the distant future while higher ranking users (and therefore servers) are less likely diff --git a/specification/proposals_intro.rst b/specification/proposals_intro.rst index a54f7bca..4749457b 100644 --- a/specification/proposals_intro.rst +++ b/specification/proposals_intro.rst @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ unclear if an MSC will require an implementation proof, ask in `#matrix-spec:mat `_. Early release of an MSC/idea -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To help facilitate early releases of software dependent on a spec release, implementations are required to use the following process to ensure that the official Matrix namespace