Skip to content

MSC4454: Deprecating Spoiler Fallback In Media Repository#4454

Open
dozro wants to merge 5 commits intomatrix-org:mainfrom
dozro:deprecate-spoiler-plaintext-fallback
Open

MSC4454: Deprecating Spoiler Fallback In Media Repository#4454
dozro wants to merge 5 commits intomatrix-org:mainfrom
dozro:deprecate-spoiler-plaintext-fallback

Conversation

@dozro
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@dozro dozro commented Apr 22, 2026

@dozro dozro changed the title MSC0000: Deprecating Spoiler Fallback In Media Repository MSC4454: Deprecating Spoiler Fallback In Media Repository Apr 22, 2026
@dozro dozro marked this pull request as ready for review April 22, 2026 18:36
@tulir tulir added proposal A matrix spec change proposal 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. labels Apr 22, 2026
Comment thread proposals/4454-deprecating-spoiler-fallback-in-media-repository.md Outdated
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implementation requirements:

  • Client that sends the new format defined for body

Comment on lines +45 to +49
Clients generating messages with spoilers:

- MUST NOT include spoilered content in the `body` field
- MUST replace spoilered sections with a neutral placeholder (e.g. `[Spoiler]`)
- MUST encode the full spoilered content only in `formatted_body`
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The spec doesn't currently require anything like this, all the fallback stuff is SHOULD. If it's intended, might be worth calling out that change more, especially since that's the only thing that requires an implementation here

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@dozro dozro Apr 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So it should rather be a SHOULD instead of a MUST?

(changed it to SHOULD)

Updated guidelines for handling spoilered content in messages.
nushea pushed a commit to nushea/Sable-changes that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2026
…Client#715)

### Description

This pull request updates the plain text conversion logic to better
handle spoilered text, ensuring that spoiler formatting is replaced with
`[Spoiler]` in plain text fallbacks as per
[MSC4454](matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals#4454).

**Spoiler handling improvements:**

- Spoilered text (delimited by `||`) is now replaced with `[Spoiler]` in
the plain text output, matching the MSC4454 specification.

#### Type of change

- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- [ ] This change requires a documentation update

### Checklist:

- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings

### AI disclosure:

- [ ] Partially AI assisted (clarify which code was AI assisted and
briefly explain what it does).
- [ ] Fully AI generated (explain what all the generated code does in
moderate detail).

No AI involved
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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants