Add room version 11 #1604
Add room version 11 #1604
Conversation
| to the `content` of `m.room.redaction` events in *older* room versions when serving | ||
| such events over the Client-Server API. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Authorization rules |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a copy of the room v10 ones with the references to creator of the m.room.create removed.
I debated about making this a separate file (and the room v10) one so that you can diff them more easily?
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <1389908+richvdh@users.noreply.github.com>
|
I think the remaining bits are if we want to edit the examples here (see #1604 (comment)); if we need to insert the redactions twice (see #1604 (comment)). From my POV the warning box question (#1604 (comment)) is resolved with keeping it, but shout if there are changes to make. |
content/rooms/v11.md
Outdated
| Clients should no longer depend on the `creator` property in the `content` of | ||
| [`m.room.create`](/client-server-api#mroomcreate) events. In all room versions, | ||
| clients can rely on `sender` instead to determine a room creator. | ||
|
|
||
| Clients should note that the format of [`m.room.redaction`](/client-server-api#mroomredaction) | ||
| events has been modified and look for the `redacts` key under `content` instead | ||
| of a top-level event property. | ||
|
|
||
| Clients should note that the `third_party_invite` key of [`m.room.member`](/client-server-api#mroommember) | ||
| events is no longer redacted, *but* will only contain the `signed` key after redaction. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The way this is structured still makes me feel like this is an introduction, and that the real changes are going to be spelt out elsewhere.
Two things would help:
- Add an "Event format" subheading.
- Delete "Clients should note that".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried to clean this up 951f619.
I'm still not quite happy with the phrasing of the third paragraph (I copied it from the MSC3821). I think it is there because the required display_name field under m.room.member event's third_party_invite won't exist after redaction so clients shouldn't assume it is there.
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <1389908+richvdh@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Richard van der Hoff <1389908+richvdh@users.noreply.github.com>
Spec for MSC3820
Preview: https://pr1604--matrix-spec-previews.netlify.app