-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Chat Definitions #80
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Chat Definitions #80
Changes from 11 commits
cd581a8
58bfa54
da323c9
f9b9464
c02bdb3
6a62b71
540607c
cf24695
1dd9740
b3a724a
8e832ee
887318e
cb5f1b6
2c69efa
10ff3a3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| title: CHAT-DEFINITIONS | ||
| name: Shared definitions for Chat Protocols | ||
| category: Informational | ||
| tags: definitions, terminology, reference | ||
| editor: | ||
| contributors: | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| ## Abstract | ||
|
|
||
| This specification establishes a common vocabulary and standardized definitions for terms used across chat protocol specifications. It serves as a normative reference to ensure consistent interpretation of terminology across application level specifications. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Background / Rationale / Motivation | ||
|
|
||
| Chat protocol specifications often employ similar terminology with subtle but important semantic differences. The absence of standardized definitions leads to ambiguity in specification interpretation and implementation inconsistencies across different protocol variants. | ||
|
|
||
| Establishing a shared definitions document provides several benefits: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. **Semantic Consistency**: Ensures uniform interpretation of common terms across multiple specifications | ||
| 2. **Implementation Clarity**: Reduces ambiguity for protocol implementers | ||
| 3. **Specification Quality**: Enables more precise and concise specification language through reference to established definitions | ||
| 4. **Ecosystem Coherence**: Promotes consistent understanding within the chat protocol ecosystem. | ||
|
|
||
| This specification provides normative definitions that other chat protocol specifications MAY reference to establish precise semantic meaning for common terminology. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Theory / Semantics | ||
|
|
||
| ### Definition Categories | ||
|
|
||
| Terms are organized into the following categories for clarity and ease of reference: | ||
|
|
||
| - **Roles**: Defined entity types that determine how a participant behaves within a communication protocol. | ||
| - **Message Types**: Classifications and categories of protocol messages | ||
| - **Transports**: Abstract methods of transmitting payloads | ||
| ## Definitions | ||
|
|
||
| ### Accounts + Identity | ||
|
|
||
| ### Roles | ||
|
|
||
| **Sender**: A client which is pushing a payload on to the network, to one or more recipients. | ||
|
|
||
| **Recipient**: A client which is the intended receiver of a payload. In a group context there maybe multiple recipients | ||
|
|
||
| **Participant**: A generic term for the rightful members of a conversation. Senders and Recipients are roles that participants can hold. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Message Types | ||
|
|
||
| **Payload**: The encoded bytes as produced by a chat protocol. The term `message` is avoided due to conflicts with other layers. | ||
|
|
||
| **Frame**: A data structure which is required to implement a chat protocol. Frames are used to disambiguate the objects defined by chat protocols from transport 'messages' and application `content`. | ||
|
||
|
|
||
| **Content**: The data that is intended for end-users or applications. Chat protocols transmit and route content between clients. | ||
|
|
||
| **Content Type**: The structured format of content. These data structures represent specific encodings of Text, Image, Audio data. | ||
|
|
||
| **Delivery Acknowledgement**: A notification from a receiving client to sender that their message was successfully received. While similar to a read-receipt delivery acknowledgements differ in that the acknowledgement originates based on the client, where read-receipts are fired when they are displayed to a user. | ||
|
|
||
| **Invite**: An protocol message from one client to another to establish a communication channel. Invites notify a client that someone wants to communicate with them, and provides the required information to do so. | ||
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ### Transports | ||
|
|
||
| **Out-of-Band**: The transfer of information using a channel separate from the defined protocol channel. Data sent Out-of-Band is transmitted using an undefined mechanism. This is used when protocols requires information to be shared with another entity, but it does not describe how that should occur. The responsibility to define how this occurs is the implementer or other protocols in the suite. | ||
jazzz marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ### Software Entities | ||
|
|
||
| **Client**: Software that implements a chat protocol. It is responsible for establishing and maintaining communication with the underlying network, performing protocol operations (e.g., encryption, key management, frame generation), and exposing an interface for higher-level software. A Client serves as the technical component that provides messaging capabilities to Applications. | ||
|
||
|
|
||
| **Application**: Software that integrates with a Client in order to send and receive content. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Wire Format Specification / Syntax | ||
|
|
||
| This specification does not define wire format elements. All definitions are semantic and apply to the interpretation of terms used in other specifications that do define wire formats. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Security/Privacy Considerations | ||
|
|
||
| This specification defines terminology only and does not introduce security or privacy considerations beyond those present in specifications that reference these definitions. | ||
|
|
||
| The definitions provided in this specification do not alter the security or privacy properties of implementations that adopt the defined terminology. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Copyright | ||
|
|
||
| Copyright and related rights waived via [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). | ||
|
|
||
| ## References | ||
|
|
||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | ||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.