From 7775f11d09ea3a4cdd9c55b6ec8fb6ce62bb3b17 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Jonas=20Sch=C3=A4fer?= Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2021 20:53:50 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ProtoXEP: Content Rating Labels --- inbox/content-ratings.xml | 193 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 193 insertions(+) create mode 100644 inbox/content-ratings.xml diff --git a/inbox/content-ratings.xml b/inbox/content-ratings.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000..09cb911d --- /dev/null +++ b/inbox/content-ratings.xml @@ -0,0 +1,193 @@ + + +%ents; +]> + +
+Content Rating Labels +This specification provides a wire format in the form of a Service Discovery extension to allow services of various kinds to publish information about the kind of content they allow and/or endorse on their platform. +&LEGALNOTICE; +xxxx +ProtoXEP +Standards Track +Standards +Council + + + +crl + +Jonas +Schäfer +jonas@zombofant.net +jonas@zombofant.net + + +0.0.1 +2021-03-03 +jsc + +

First draft.

+ + +
+ + +

The more a communication system grows and increases its diversity, the more +likely it is that conflicts arise over which content is acceptable and which +is not. In addition, some content may be psychologically triggering or harmful +to different people or age groups, while the same content may be desirable to +share and talk about in other groups.

+ +

This specification intends to provide a machine-readable and extensible way of +conveying the kinds and classes of content which are acceptable, and hence to +be expected, on a service. Such a service can be an instant messaging account +server, a &xep0045; service or room, a &xep0369; service or channel or any +other entity which is able to publish extensions as per &xep0128;.

+ +

The content ratings are provided as a set of free-form strings, scoped by a +type URI.

+ + + +

This idea is not new. The W3C for instance has had two initiatives revolving +around labelling content for the web. The +Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS) +has been superseded by the +Protocol for Web Description Resources (POWDER).

+ +

While the PICS approach is roughly similar to what this document intends to +achieve, the POWDER standard goes way beyond that and provides much more +extension points, at the cost of higher complexity.

+ +

&xep0258; provides a way to embed security labels in contexts where clearance +to view specific content is required. While the rating of content is roughly +similar, the XEP-0258 standard goes beyond that by placing restrictions +on entities which carry such labels in a way which is not desirable for this +standard.

+ +

Specifically, the document states that supporting implementations MUST NOT +allow the <securitylabel/> element outside of contexts of specifications +known to them, which could pose interoperability issues if that element was +reused for this specification.

+ + + +
    +
  • Extensibility: The protocol must allow for custom labels in both +federated and non-federated contexts.
    • +
  • Flexibility: The protocol must allow for use in different contexts. It +must not be tied to &xep0045; services only, nor must it be restricted to +be applied to messages.
    • +
  • Machine readability: All labels need to have a definition which can be +used in filtering or selection algorithms in order to remove/provide +specific kinds of content.
    • +
  • Interoperability: Applications should be able to make an approximate +choice even if the label set contains labels which are not known to it.
    • +
+ + + +

Content Label: +A free-form string qualified by a type URI.

+ +

Content Rating: +A set of Content Labels which describe the describes the classes of +content which may be encountered at the entity to which the rating +applies.

+ + + +

The Content Rating is conveyed using a set of free-form strings qualified +by a type attribute, the Content Labels.

+ +

A Content Label is represented by a single XML <simple-label/> element +qualified by the urn:xmpp:crl:0 namespace:

+ +type-defined string format]]> + +

The type attribute MUST be a URI. It defines the format of the CDATA +contained in the <simple-label/> element. The character data of the +<simple-label/> element MUST NOT contain control codes (including newline +and horizontal tab).

+ +

The type URI must be URL-encoded, escaping all whitespace.

+ +

A Content Rating is represented by a <content-rating/> XML element qualified +by the urn:xmpp:crl:0 namespace. It carries zero or more <simple-label/> +child elements as described above.

+ +

Future extensions MAY specify other child elements for <content-rating/> in +separate namespaces. See the business rules for an approach for handling those +unexpected elements.

+ + + +

If the format needs to be conveyed in plain text form, for example to carry +the list of labels in &xep0128; or a &xep0004; configuration form, the +following algorithm is to be applied:

+ + + + + +

An entity may publish a content self-rating using &xep0128;. For this, a +&xep0004; form with the urn:xmpp:crl:0 FORM_TYPE is defined. +All labels are mapped to a single text-multi.

+ + + + urn:xmpp:crl:0 + + + http://example.com/content-ratings type-defined string format + +]]> + +

Each line in the text-multi field is prefixed with the key of the +corresponding <simple-label/> element. The key is followed by a single +space character (U+0020), followed by the character data of the +<simple-label/> element.

+ + + +

Entities with sufficient permissions to modify &xep0045; room configuration +SHOULD be offered a text-multi form field of the format described above. If +offered this field MUST be mapped to the format described above in the +&xep0030; response of the room.

+ + + +
    +
  • Implementations need to decide how to handle unknown child elements in +<content-rating/>. Depending on the level of certainty required in +interpreting a <content-rating/> element, implementations for example +choose to either silently ignore unknown elements or treat them as the worst +possible rating.
    • +
+ + + +

Implementations which convert the labels to human-readable strings need to +translate those strings. For now, no provision is made to provide +pre-translated texts.

+ + + +

REQUIRED.

+ + + +

REQUIRED.

+ + + +

REQUIRED.

+ + + +

REQUIRED for protocol specifications.

+ + +