Skip to content

Conversation

turt2live
Copy link
Member

Rendered

Disclosure: I am Director of Standards Development at The Matrix.org Foundation C.I.C., Matrix Spec Core Team (SCT) member, employed by Element, and operate the t2bot.io service. This proposal is written and published as a Trust & Safety team member allocated in full to the Foundation.

@turt2live turt2live changed the title MSC: Making mass redactions use a new event type MSC4343: Making mass redactions use a new event type Sep 6, 2025
@turt2live turt2live marked this pull request as ready for review September 6, 2025 05:32
@turt2live turt2live added proposal A matrix spec change proposal client-server Client-Server API room-spec Something to do with the room version specifications kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec needs-implementation This MSC does not have a qualifying implementation for the SCT to review. The MSC cannot enter FCP. labels Sep 6, 2025
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implementation requirements:

  • Like MSC4084, an unstable implementation in a new room version

Comment on lines +26 to 29
In order to not break old clients
completely, servers should still add a `redacts` string containing one of the
redacted event IDs to the top level of `m.room.redaction` events in *newer*
room versions when serving such events over the Client-Server API.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This doesn't seem to add up - if there's a new event type then the redacting client won't even send an m.room.redaction event. Unless the homeserver is to synthesise an m.room.redaction event, there's nowhere to add the redacts string; and if it's to synthesise the event, it should be spelled out here.

KitsuneRal added a commit to quotient-im/libQuotient that referenced this pull request Sep 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
client-server Client-Server API kind:maintenance MSC which clarifies/updates existing spec 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 room-spec Something to do with the room version specifications
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants