Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MSC4211: WebXDC on Matrix #4211

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

seija-amanojaku
Copy link

lda added 6 commits October 5, 2024 15:43
It is most likely full of errors
You can tell I'm not good at this. Also signed off.

Signed-off-by: lda <lda@ari.lt>
:(

Signed-off-by: lda <lda@ari.lt>
@tulir tulir added proposal A matrix spec change proposal client-server Client-Server API kind:feature MSC for not-core and not-maintenance stuff needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. labels Oct 5, 2024
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Implementation requirements:

  • Client

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Personally, I'd like to see feedback from a web client regarding how difficult this would be to implement, including the required sandboxing.

proposals/4211-webxdc.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@tulir tulir changed the title MSC4211 - WebXDC on Matrix MSC4211: WebXDC on Matrix Oct 5, 2024
@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
# MSC4211: WebXDC on Matrix
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isnt WebXDC just a widget with less functionality or am I missing something? Not sure if we need a second widget api 🤔

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've already mentionned this in the "Alternatives" section:

Widgets(MSC1236), while powerful, also suffer from a similar agnosticity problem with
other platforms, and has been noted as not having a "[...] canonical document to describe
[it]" last year. WebXDC also has stricter security concerns(e.g: clients cannot have
sensitive information leaked, unlike widgets), thus making it safer.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the lack of a canonical document is a Matrix spec issue rather than a shortcoming of widgets themselves? IIUC, the main selling point of WebXDC appears to be that it doesn't require another server.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the lack of a canonical document is a Matrix spec issue rather than a shortcoming of widgets themselves?

Seeing it like that, yeah, will correct that back

IIUC, the main selling point of WebXDC appears to be that it doesn't require another server.

It also is. WebXDC is mostly self-contained (and here, the only real requirement is that you can actually get a MXC URI of the actual WebXDC container)

Copy link

@toger5 toger5 Oct 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Its super cool to see someone looking into matrix+WebXDC. I have spend some time looking into it as well and liked the potential.

My appraoch during this investigation was to build a WebXDC container widget. It would load the WebXDC content and forward messages back and forth. It could also take care of putting everything into threads (this is the only way we can have proper back pagination with the widget api as of today) and abstract all this "bridging work" away from the client.

As mentioned before this would be sth each client would need to support.

Comment on lines 126 to 133
Another way to have interactive content in rooms would be to use an integration manager.
However, these would require an additional server to be setup(which are not maintained),
and would effectively be limited to the Matrix ecosystem only, instead of being platform-
agnostic.
Widgets(MSC1236), while powerful, also suffer from a similar agnosticity problem with
other platforms, and has been noted as not having a "[...] canonical document to describe
[it]" last year. WebXDC also has stricter security concerns(e.g: clients cannot have
sensitive information leaked, unlike widgets), thus making it safer.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would love to see a WebXDC widget container alternative section.
As described here: #4211 (comment)

also suffer from a similar agnosticity problem with
other platforms

Clients would then support WebXDC through the widget api (dont need to implement both and we have WebXDC for some cases as a valid option to reach larger audiences

would be to use an integration manager

The integration manager is not strictly required. It is possible to also add widgets as a client feature or manually.

additional server to be setup

this is still true even if the widget setup itself does not require an integration manager the widget needs to be hosted somewhere. A method to load the widget from a matrix media repository would be very interesting.

@farooqkz
Copy link

farooqkz commented Oct 9, 2024

Cheers! Looking forward to see WebXDC in Matrix!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
client-server Client-Server API hacktoberfest-accepted kind:feature MSC for not-core and not-maintenance stuff needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. proposal A matrix spec change proposal
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants