|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Receipts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{< changed-in v="1.4" >}} Added private read receipts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This module adds in support for receipts. These receipts are a form of
|
|
|
|
acknowledgement of an event. This module defines the `m.read` receipt
|
|
|
|
for indicating that the user has read up to a given event, and `m.read.private`
|
|
|
|
to achieve the same purpose without any other user being aware. Primarily,
|
|
|
|
`m.read.private` is intended to clear [notifications](#receiving-notifications)
|
|
|
|
without advertising read-up-to status to others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sending a receipt for each event can result in sending large amounts of
|
|
|
|
traffic to a homeserver. To prevent this from becoming a problem,
|
|
|
|
receipts are implemented using "up to" markers. This marker indicates
|
|
|
|
that the acknowledgement applies to all events "up to and including" the
|
|
|
|
event specified. For example, marking an event as "read" would indicate
|
|
|
|
that the user had read all events *up to* the referenced event. See the
|
|
|
|
[Receiving notifications](#receiving-notifications) section for more
|
|
|
|
information on how read receipts affect notification counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{< added-in v="1.4" >}} Read receipts exist in three major forms:
|
|
|
|
* Unthreaded: Denotes a read-up-to receipt regardless of threads. This is how
|
|
|
|
pre-threading read receipts worked.
|
|
|
|
* Threaded, main timeline: Denotes a read-up-to receipt for events not in a
|
|
|
|
particular thread. Identified by the thread ID `main`.
|
|
|
|
* Threaded, in a thread: Denotes a read-up-to receipt within a particular
|
|
|
|
thread. Identified by the event ID of the thread root.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threaded read receipts are discussed in further detail [below](#threaded-read-receipts).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Events
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{< changed-in v="1.4" >}} Each `user_id`, `receipt_type`, and categorisation
|
|
|
|
(unthreaded, or `thread_id`) tuple must be associated with only a single
|
|
|
|
`event_id`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{% event event="m.receipt" %}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Client behaviour
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{< changed-in v="1.4" >}} Altered to support threaded read receipts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In `/sync`, receipts are listed under the `ephemeral` array of events
|
|
|
|
for a given room. New receipts that come down the event streams are
|
|
|
|
deltas which update existing mappings. Clients should replace older
|
|
|
|
receipt acknowledgements based on `user_id`, `receipt_type`, and the
|
|
|
|
`thread_id` (if present).
|
|
|
|
For example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client receives m.receipt:
|
|
|
|
user = @alice:example.com
|
|
|
|
receipt_type = m.read
|
|
|
|
event_id = $aaa:example.com
|
|
|
|
thread_id = undefined
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client receives another m.receipt:
|
|
|
|
user = @alice:example.com
|
|
|
|
receipt_type = m.read
|
|
|
|
event_id = $bbb:example.com
|
|
|
|
thread_id = main
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The client does not replace any acknowledgements, yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client receives yet another m.receipt:
|
|
|
|
user = @alice:example.com
|
|
|
|
receipt_type = m.read
|
|
|
|
event_id = $ccc:example.com
|
|
|
|
thread_id = undefined
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The client replaces the older acknowledgement for $aaa:example.com
|
|
|
|
with this new one for $ccc:example.com, but does not replace the
|
|
|
|
acknowledgement for $bbb:example.com because it belongs to a thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client receives yet another m.receipt:
|
|
|
|
user = @alice:example.com
|
|
|
|
receipt_type = m.read
|
|
|
|
event_id = $ddd:example.com
|
|
|
|
thread_id = main
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now the client replaces the older $bbb:example.com acknowledgement with
|
|
|
|
this new $ddd:example.com acknowledgement. The client does NOT replace the
|
|
|
|
older acknowledgement for $ccc:example.com as it is unthreaded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients should send read receipts when there is some certainty that the
|
|
|
|
event in question has been **displayed** to the user. Simply receiving
|
|
|
|
an event does not provide enough certainty that the user has seen the
|
|
|
|
event. The user SHOULD need to *take some action* such as viewing the
|
|
|
|
room that the event was sent to or dismissing a notification in order
|
|
|
|
for the event to count as "read". Clients SHOULD NOT send read receipts
|
|
|
|
for events sent by their own user.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar to the rules for sending receipts, threaded receipts should appear
|
|
|
|
in the context of the thread. If a thread is rendered behind a disclosure,
|
|
|
|
the client hasn't yet shown the event (or any applicable read receipts)
|
|
|
|
to the user. Once they expand the thread though, a threaded read receipt
|
|
|
|
would be sent and per-thread receipts from other users shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A client can update the markers for its user by interacting with the
|
|
|
|
following HTTP APIs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{% http-api spec="client-server" api="receipts" %}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Private read receipts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{% added-in v="1.4" %}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some users would like to mark a room as read, clearing their [notification counts](#receiving-notifications),
|
|
|
|
but not give away the fact that they've read a particular message yet. To
|
|
|
|
achieve this, clients can send `m.read.private` receipts instead of `m.read`
|
|
|
|
to do exactly that: clear notifications and not broadcast the receipt to
|
|
|
|
other users.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servers MUST NOT send the `m.read.private` receipt to any other user than the
|
|
|
|
one which originally sent it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Between `m.read` and `m.read.private`, the receipt which is more "ahead" or
|
|
|
|
"recent" is used when determining the highest read-up-to mark. See the
|
|
|
|
[notifications](#receiving-notifications) section for more information on
|
|
|
|
how this affects notification counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If a client sends an `m.read` receipt which is "behind" the `m.read.private`
|
|
|
|
receipt, other users will see that change happen but the sending user will
|
|
|
|
not have their notification counts rewound to that point in time. While
|
|
|
|
uncommon, it is considered valid to have an `m.read` (public) receipt lag
|
|
|
|
several messages behind the `m.read.private` receipt, for example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Threaded read receipts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{% added-in v="1.4" %}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If a client does not use [threading](#threading), then they will simply only
|
|
|
|
send "unthreaded" read receipts which affect the whole room regardless of threads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A threaded read receipt is simply one which has a `thread_id` on it, targeting
|
|
|
|
either a thread root's event ID or `main` for the main timeline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threading introduces a concept of multiple conversations being held in the same
|
|
|
|
room and thus deserve their own read receipts and notification counts. An event is
|
|
|
|
considered to be "in a thread" if it meets any of the following criteria:
|
|
|
|
* It has a `rel_type` of `m.thread`.
|
|
|
|
* It has child events with a `rel_type` of `m.thread` (in which case it'd be the
|
|
|
|
thread root).
|
|
|
|
* Following the event relationships, it has a parent event which qualifies for
|
|
|
|
one of the above. Implementations should not recurse infinitely, though: a
|
|
|
|
maximum of 3 hops is recommended to cover indirect relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Events not in a thread but still in the room are considered to be part of the
|
|
|
|
"main timeline", or a special thread with an ID of `main`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following is an example DAG for a room, with dotted lines showing event
|
|
|
|
relationships and solid lines showing topological ordering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![threaded-dag](/diagrams/threaded-dag.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This DAG can be represented as 3 threaded timelines, with `A` and `B` being thread
|
|
|
|
roots:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![threaded-dag-threads](/diagrams/threaded-dag-threads.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With this, we can demonstrate that:
|
|
|
|
* A threaded read receipt on `I` would mark `A`, `B`, and `I` as read.
|
|
|
|
* A threaded read receipt on `E` would mark `C` and `E` as read.
|
|
|
|
* An unthreaded read receipt on `D` would mark `A`, `B`, `C`, and `D` as read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that marking `A` as read with a threaded read receipt would not mean
|
|
|
|
that `C`, `E`, `G`, or `H` get marked as read: Thread A's timeline would need
|
|
|
|
its own threaded read receipt at `H` to accomplish that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The read receipts for the above 3 examples would be:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
"$I": {
|
|
|
|
"m.read": {
|
|
|
|
"@user:example.org": {
|
|
|
|
"ts": 1661384801651,
|
|
|
|
"thread_id": "main" // because `I` is not in a thread, but is a threaded receipt
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
"$E": {
|
|
|
|
"m.read": {
|
|
|
|
"@user:example.org": {
|
|
|
|
"ts": 1661384801651,
|
|
|
|
"thread_id": "$A" // because `E` is in Thread `A`
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
"$D": {
|
|
|
|
"m.read": {
|
|
|
|
"@user:example.org": {
|
|
|
|
"ts": 1661384801651
|
|
|
|
// no `thread_id` because the receipt is *unthreaded*
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conditions on sending read receipts apply similarly to threaded and unthreaded read
|
|
|
|
receipts. For example, a client might send a private read receipt for a threaded
|
|
|
|
event when the user expands that thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Server behaviour
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For efficiency, receipts SHOULD be batched into one event per room
|
|
|
|
before delivering them to clients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some receipts are sent across federation as EDUs with type `m.receipt`. The
|
|
|
|
format of the EDUs are:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
<room_id>: {
|
|
|
|
<receipt_type>: {
|
|
|
|
<user_id>: { <content (ts & thread_id, currently)> }
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These are always sent as deltas to previously sent receipts. Currently
|
|
|
|
only a single `<receipt_type>` should be used: `m.read`. `m.read.private`
|
|
|
|
MUST NOT appear in this federated `m.receipt` EDU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Security considerations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As receipts are sent outside the context of the event graph, there are
|
|
|
|
no integrity checks performed on the contents of `m.receipt` events.
|