MSC4175: Profile field for user time zone

[clokep]

Rendered

Signed-off-by: Patrick Cloke [email protected]

---

Implementations:

• Element Web: Add timezone to user profile element-hq/matrix-react-sdk#20
• gomuks: Add timezones and pronouns gomuks/gomuks#574

---

SCT:

FCP tickyboxes

MSC checklist

[Half-Shot]

matrix-org/matrix-react-sdk#12967 is an implementation of this.

[x86pup]

conduwuit server-side partial implementation: https://github.com/girlbossceo/conduwuit/commit/f163ebf3bbaa9656bbf1d78355220e1d859b17c7#diff-6f6ce4833edde4b67f9f5c950adce5338f3e3a19b6d287c33ff4e9d290b94fa1

ruwuma (our ruma fork) partial implementation for conduwuit:

• https://github.com/girlbossceo/ruwuma/commit/bf93f9caa610bbabc0ab5dab9231505253d0c198
• https://github.com/girlbossceo/ruwuma/commit/0aa4cc4f9c5febacbdba7325129dffe75135890b
• https://github.com/girlbossceo/ruwuma/commit/83a9bf73668aa459ffcf5ca6f95639835c0bac79

The partial implementation only supports GET/PUT/DELETE for just the us.cloke.msc4175.tz field. More thought into supporting "generic" K-V fields is being done, but at least gets a basic implementation through the door that can be usable in any future clients that implement the timezone field (which seems likely soon 😇).

[clokep]

Judging by this having an implementation I think this isn't really a draft anymore.

[tcpipuk]

This is also implemented in gomuks: gomuks/gomuks#574

[clokep]

This has a couple of implementations and has proven useful already.

I think it is reasonable and doesn't have too much room for abuse.

@mscbot fcp merge

[mscbot]

Team member @mscbot has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged people:

• @clokep
• @dbkr
• @uhoreg
• @turt2live
• @ara4n
• @anoadragon453
• @richvdh
• @tulir
• @erikjohnston
• @KitsuneRal

Concerns:

• checklist incomplete

Once at least 75% of reviewers approve (and there are no outstanding concerns), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for information about what commands tagged team members can give me.

[ara4n]

I have to say i am quite uneasy about this MSC - it feels like a slippery slope towards bloating out the Matrix spec with an overlapping and incomplete implementation of JSContact (RFC9553).

But on the other hand, RFC9553 simply doesn't contain a "current timezone for user" attribute - it's only available as an attribute on physical addresses. And RFC9553 is for describing addressbook entries... not profile information (which is subtly semantically different: the data you expect to see in your Contacts app in your phone is definitely different shape to the data you expect to see on someone's LinkedIin profile for instance).

So perhaps the best bet here is to just bite the bullet and spec our own field types like this. But I really hope we end up finding a way to put them in their own registry rather than bulk out the rest of the spec - and to indirect to the likes of RFC9553 where we conceivably can.

[clokep]

I have to say i am quite uneasy about this MSC - it feels like a slippery slope towards bloating out the Matrix spec with an overlapping and incomplete implementation of JSContact (RFC9553).

This is the reason I let this sit for so long without pushing this harder after MSC4133 was merged. I'm not really sure how I feel about it but didn't see a better option, especially given there is no explicit time zone field in RFC9553 as you mention below.

I was hoping other SCT members would shout if this seemed to go in the direction of NIH.

which is subtly semantically different: the data you expect to see in your Contacts app in your phone is definitely different shape to the data you expect to see on someone's LinkedIin profile for instance

Agreed that it is different, much of the info overlaps as it is describing a person, but the context is different.

So perhaps the best bet here is to just bite the bullet and spec our own field types like this. But I really hope we end up finding a way to put them in their own registry rather than bulk out the rest of the spec - and to indirect to the likes of RFC9553 where we conceivably can.

We could have a field contains a JScontact (or a link to one), but that's a bit beyond this MSC. I agree though that we should not redefine solved things.

[clokep]

@ara4n Let me know if you want any updates for this or not, I'm unsure if the alternatives section should be fleshed out more?

[mscbot]

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

[mscbot]

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

[turt2live]

Spec PR: matrix-org/matrix-spec#2206

[turt2live]

Merged 🎉