|
|
|
|
@ -162,6 +162,19 @@ we already have. So, we'll show inconsistent data until we backfill the gap.
|
|
|
|
|
* We'd need to worry about pagination.
|
|
|
|
|
* This is probably the best solution, but can also be added as a v2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Limitations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based solely on this MSC, relations are only received as discrete events in
|
|
|
|
|
the timeline, so clients may only have an incomplete image of all the relations
|
|
|
|
|
with an event if they do not fill gaps in the timeline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In practice, this has proven not to be too big of a problem, as reactions
|
|
|
|
|
(as proposed in [MSC 2677](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/pull/2677))
|
|
|
|
|
tend to be posted close after the target event in the timeline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A more complete solution to this has been deferred to
|
|
|
|
|
[MSC2675](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/pull/2675).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Tradeoffs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Event shape
|
|
|
|
|
|