|
|
|
Instant Messaging
|
|
|
|
=================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _module:im:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This module adds support for sending human-readable messages to a room. It also
|
|
|
|
adds support for associating human-readable information with the room itself
|
|
|
|
such as a room name and topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Events
|
|
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{m_room_message_event}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{m_room_message_feedback_event}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Usage of this event is discouraged for several reasons:
|
|
|
|
- The number of feedback events will grow very quickly with the number of users
|
|
|
|
in the room. This event provides no way to "batch" feedback, unlike the
|
|
|
|
`receipts module`_.
|
|
|
|
- Pairing feedback to messages gets complicated when paginating as feedback
|
|
|
|
arrives before the message it is acknowledging.
|
|
|
|
- There are no guarantees that the client has seen the event ID being
|
|
|
|
acknowledged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _`receipts module`: `module:receipts`_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{m_room_name_event}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{m_room_topic_event}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{m_room_avatar_event}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
m.room.message msgtypes
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each `m.room.message`_ MUST have a ``msgtype`` key which identifies the type
|
|
|
|
of message being sent. Each type has their own required and optional keys, as
|
|
|
|
outlined below. If a client cannot display the given ``msgtype`` then it SHOULD
|
|
|
|
display the fallback plain text ``body`` key instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{msgtype_events}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client behaviour
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients SHOULD verify the structure of incoming events to ensure that the
|
|
|
|
expected keys exist and that they are of the right type. Clients can discard
|
|
|
|
malformed events or display a placeholder message to the user. Redacted
|
|
|
|
``m.room.message`` events MUST be removed from the client. This can either be
|
|
|
|
replaced with placeholder text (e.g. "[REDACTED]") or the redacted message can
|
|
|
|
be removed entirely from the messages view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Events which have attachments (e.g. ``m.image``, ``m.file``) SHOULD be
|
|
|
|
uploaded using the `content repository module`_ where available. The
|
|
|
|
resulting ``mxc://`` URI can then be used in the ``url`` key.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _`content repository module`: `module:content`_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommendations when sending messages
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the event of send failure, clients SHOULD retry requests using an
|
|
|
|
exponential-backoff algorithm for a
|
|
|
|
certain amount of time T. It is recommended that T is no longer than 5 minutes.
|
|
|
|
After this time, the client should stop retrying and mark the message as "unsent".
|
|
|
|
Users should be able to manually resend unsent messages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Users may type several messages at once and send them all in quick succession.
|
|
|
|
Clients SHOULD preserve the order in which they were sent by the user. This
|
|
|
|
means that clients should wait for the response to the previous request before
|
|
|
|
sending the next request. This can lead to head-of-line blocking. In order to
|
|
|
|
reduce the impact of head-of-line blocking, clients should use a queue per room
|
|
|
|
rather than a global queue, as ordering is only relevant within a single room
|
|
|
|
rather than between rooms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local echo
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Messages SHOULD appear immediately in the message view when a user presses the
|
|
|
|
"send" button. This should occur even if the message is still sending. This is
|
|
|
|
referred to as "local echo". Clients SHOULD implement "local echo" of messages.
|
|
|
|
Clients MAY display messages in a different format to indicate that the server
|
|
|
|
has not processed the message. This format should be removed when the server
|
|
|
|
responds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients need to be able to match the message they are sending with the same
|
|
|
|
message which they receive from the event stream. The echo of the same message
|
|
|
|
from the event stream is referred to as "remote echo". Both echoes need to be
|
|
|
|
identified as the same message in order to prevent duplicate messages being
|
|
|
|
displayed. Ideally this pairing would occur transparently to the user: the UI
|
|
|
|
would not flicker as it transitions from local to remote. Flickering cannot be
|
|
|
|
fully avoided in the current client-server API. Two scenarios need to be
|
|
|
|
considered:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- The client sends a message and the remote echo arrives on the event stream
|
|
|
|
*after* the request to send the message completes.
|
|
|
|
- The client sends a message and the remote echo arrives on the event stream
|
|
|
|
*before* the request to send the message completes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the first scenario, the client will receive an event ID when the request to
|
|
|
|
send the message completes. This ID can be used to identify the duplicate event
|
|
|
|
when it arrives on the event stream. However, in the second scenario, the event
|
|
|
|
arrives before the client has obtained an event ID. This makes it impossible to
|
|
|
|
identify it as a duplicate event. This results in the client displaying the
|
|
|
|
message twice for a fraction of a second before the the original request to send
|
|
|
|
the message completes. Once it completes, the client can take remedial actions
|
|
|
|
to remove the duplicate event by looking for duplicate event IDs. A future version
|
|
|
|
of the client-server API will resolve this by attaching the transaction ID of the
|
|
|
|
sending request to the event itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculating the display name for a user
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients may wish to show the human-readable display name of a room member as
|
|
|
|
part of a membership list, or when they send a message. However, different
|
|
|
|
members may have conflicting display names. Display names MUST be disambiguated
|
|
|
|
before showing them to the user, in order to prevent spoofing of other users.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To ensure this is done consistently across clients, clients SHOULD use the
|
|
|
|
following algorithm to calculate a disambiguated display name for a given user:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Inspect the ``m.room.member`` state event for the relevant user id.
|
|
|
|
2. If the ``m.room.member`` state event has no ``displayname`` field, or if
|
|
|
|
that field has a ``null`` value, use the raw user id as the display
|
|
|
|
name. Otherwise:
|
|
|
|
3. If the ``m.room.member`` event has a ``displayname`` which is unique among
|
|
|
|
members of the room with ``membership: join`` or ``membership: invite``, use
|
|
|
|
the given ``displayname`` as the user-visible display name. Otherwise:
|
|
|
|
4. The ``m.room.member`` event has a non-unique ``displayname``. This should be
|
|
|
|
disambiguated using the user id, for example "display name
|
|
|
|
(@id:homeserver.org)".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. TODO-spec
|
|
|
|
what does it mean for a ``displayname`` to be 'unique'? Are we
|
|
|
|
case-sensitive? Do we care about homograph attacks? See
|
|
|
|
https://matrix.org/jira/browse/SPEC-221.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Developers should take note of the following when implementing the above
|
|
|
|
algorithm:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The user-visible display name of one member can be affected by changes in the
|
|
|
|
state of another member. For example, if ``@user1:matrix.org`` is present in
|
|
|
|
a room, with ``displayname: Alice``, then when ``@user2:example.com`` joins
|
|
|
|
the room, also with ``displayname: Alice``, *both* users must be given
|
|
|
|
disambiguated display names. Similarly, when one of the users then changes
|
|
|
|
their display name, there is no longer a clash, and *both* users can be given
|
|
|
|
their chosen display name. Clients should be alert to this possibility and
|
|
|
|
ensure that all affected users are correctly renamed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The display name of a room may also be affected by changes in the membership
|
|
|
|
list. This is due to the room name sometimes being based on user display
|
|
|
|
names (see `Calculating the display name for a room`_).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* If the entire membership list is searched for clashing display names, this
|
|
|
|
leads to an O(N^2) implementation for building the list of room members. This
|
|
|
|
will be very inefficient for rooms with large numbers of members. It is
|
|
|
|
recommended that client implementations maintain a hash table mapping from
|
|
|
|
``displayname`` to a list of room members using that name. Such a table can
|
|
|
|
then be used for efficient calculation of whether disambiguation is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Displaying membership information with messages
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients may wish to show the display name and avatar URL of the room member who
|
|
|
|
sent a message. This can be achieved by inspecting the ``m.room.member`` state
|
|
|
|
event for that user ID (see `Calculating the display name for a user`_).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When a user paginates the message history, clients may wish to show the
|
|
|
|
**historical** display name and avatar URL for a room member. This is possible
|
|
|
|
because older ``m.room.member`` events are returned when paginating. This can
|
|
|
|
be implemented efficiently by keeping two sets of room state: old and current.
|
|
|
|
As new events arrive and/or the user paginates back in time, these two sets of
|
|
|
|
state diverge from each other. New events update the current state and paginated
|
|
|
|
events update the old state. When paginated events are processed sequentially,
|
|
|
|
the old state represents the state of the room *at the time the event was sent*.
|
|
|
|
This can then be used to set the historical display name and avatar URL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculating the display name for a room
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients may wish to show a human-readable name for a room. There are a number
|
|
|
|
of possibilities for choosing a useful name. To ensure that rooms are named
|
|
|
|
consistently across clients, clients SHOULD use the following algorithm to
|
|
|
|
choose a name:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. If the room has an `m.room.name`_ state event with a non-empty ``name``
|
|
|
|
field, use the name given by that field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If the room has an `m.room.canonical_alias`_ state event with a non-empty
|
|
|
|
``alias`` field, use the alias given by that field as the name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If neither of the above conditions are met, a name should be composed based
|
|
|
|
on the members of the room. Clients should consider `m.room.member`_ events
|
|
|
|
for users other than the logged-in user, with ``membership: join`` or
|
|
|
|
``membership: invite``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _active_members:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i. If there is only one such event, the display name for the room should be
|
|
|
|
the `disambiguated display name`_ of the corresponding user.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If there are two such events, they should be lexicographically sorted by
|
|
|
|
their ``state_key`` (i.e. the corresponding user IDs), and the display
|
|
|
|
name for the room should be the `disambiguated display name`_ of both
|
|
|
|
users: "<user1> and <user2>", or a localised variant thereof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If there are three or more such events, the display name for the room
|
|
|
|
should be based on the disambiguated display name of the user
|
|
|
|
corresponding to the first such event, under a lexicographical sorting
|
|
|
|
according to their ``state_key``. The display name should be in the
|
|
|
|
format "<user1> and <N> others" (or a localised variant thereof), where N
|
|
|
|
is the number of `m.room.member`_ events with ``membership: join`` or
|
|
|
|
``membership: invite``, excluding the logged-in user and "user1".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, if Alice joins a room, where Bob (whose user id is
|
|
|
|
``@superuser:example.com``), Carol (user id ``@carol:example.com``) and
|
|
|
|
Dan (user id ``@dan:matrix.org``) are in conversation, Alice's
|
|
|
|
client should show the room name as "Carol and 2 others".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. TODO-spec
|
|
|
|
Sorting by user_id certainly isn't ideal, as IDs at the start of the
|
|
|
|
alphabet will end up dominating room names: they will all be called
|
|
|
|
"Arathorn and 15 others". Furthermore - user_ids are not necessarily
|
|
|
|
ASCII, which means we need to either specify a collation order, or specify
|
|
|
|
how to choose one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ideally we might sort by the time when the user was first invited to, or
|
|
|
|
first joined the room. But we don't have this information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See https://matrix.org/jira/browse/SPEC-267 for further discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If the room has no non-empty ``m.room.name`` or ``m.room.canonical_alias``
|
|
|
|
event, and no active members other than the current user, clients should
|
|
|
|
consider ``m.room.member`` events with ``membership: leave``. If such events
|
|
|
|
exist, a display name such as "Empty room (was <user1> and <N> others)" (or
|
|
|
|
a localised variant thereof) should be used, following similar rules as for
|
|
|
|
active members (see `above <active_members_>`_).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. A complete absence of room name, canonical alias, and room members is likely
|
|
|
|
to indicate a problem with creating the room or synchronising the state
|
|
|
|
table; however clients should still handle this situation. A display name
|
|
|
|
such as "Empty room" (or a localised variant thereof) should be used in this
|
|
|
|
situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _`disambiguated display name`: `Calculating the display name for a user`_
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients SHOULD NOT use `m.room.aliases`_ events as a source for room names, as
|
|
|
|
it is difficult for clients to agree on the best alias to use, and aliases can
|
|
|
|
change unexpectedly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. TODO-spec
|
|
|
|
How can we make this less painful for clients to implement, without forcing
|
|
|
|
an English-language implementation on them all?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Server behaviour
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homeservers SHOULD reject ``m.room.message`` events which don't have a
|
|
|
|
``msgtype`` key, or which don't have a textual ``body`` key, with an HTTP status
|
|
|
|
code of 400.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security considerations
|
|
|
|
-----------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Messages sent using this module are not encrypted, although end to end encryption is in development (see `E2E module`_).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clients should sanitise **all displayed keys** for unsafe HTML to prevent Cross-Site
|
|
|
|
Scripting (XSS) attacks. This includes room names and topics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _`E2E module`: `module:e2e`_
|