|
| 1 | +# MSCXXXX Custom Images in Reactions |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +One of the most desired features within the Matrix ecosystem is the ability to |
| 4 | +react to messages with custom images. This feature is especially requested by |
| 5 | +users who come from Slack and Discord where this functionality is one of the |
| 6 | +main ways that the culture of a chat rooms develops. |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +There is an existing proposal to |
| 9 | +[render image data in reactions (MSC3746)](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3746/), |
| 10 | +but it has had little attention recently and has the flaw of not being conducive |
| 11 | +to deduplication (either on the client or server). Sorunome proposed a |
| 12 | +modification to that MSC to |
| 13 | +[use the MXC URI as the key](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3746/files#r866285147) |
| 14 | +which this proposal adopts. |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +This proposal is meant to replace |
| 17 | +[MSC3746](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3746/) and is |
| 18 | +additionally intended to document the behaviour of existing clients and bridges. |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +Like |
| 21 | +[MSC3746](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3746/), this |
| 22 | +MSC does not propose a mechanism for providing a list of available images. |
| 23 | + |
| 24 | +## Proposal |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +This proposal suggests two changes to events with the `m.annotation` relation. |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +1. If the `key` of an `m.annotation` relation is an MXC URI of an image, clients |
| 29 | + should render the referenced image instead of the key text. |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | + Detecting if the `key` is an MXC URI can be as sophisticated as the client |
| 32 | + wants, but this proposal recommends checking if the string starts with |
| 33 | + `mxc://`. |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +2. When the annotation's key is an MXC URI, a new (optional) `shortcode` key can |
| 36 | + be added to the content of the event with a textual name for the image. |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | + This shortcode should be shown by clients in situations such as hovering over |
| 39 | + the annotation, as alt-text, or if the client does not support rendering |
| 40 | + images. |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +Example custom image reaction event content |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +```json |
| 45 | +"content": { |
| 46 | + "m.relates_to": { |
| 47 | + "rel_type": "m.annotation", |
| 48 | + "event_id": "$abcdefg", |
| 49 | + "key": "mxc://matrix.org/VOczFYqjdGaUKNwkKsTjDwUa" |
| 50 | + }, |
| 51 | + "shortcode": ":partyparrot:" |
| 52 | +} |
| 53 | +``` |
| 54 | + |
| 55 | +## Potential issues |
| 56 | + |
| 57 | +### Clients rendering the MXC URI as text |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +The biggest disadvantage is that clients that do not support rendering custom |
| 60 | +reactions will render the MXC URI as text. However, this is already problematic |
| 61 | +because many bridges and clients already support this MSC, and users likely |
| 62 | +already encounter this. |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +### Un-renderable image referenced in the `key` |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +The MXC URI could specify an asset that either does not exist, or is not a |
| 67 | +renderable image. Clients can opt to render the `shortcode` in these situations, |
| 68 | +or some placeholder/error image, or just opt to render the full key. |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +## Alternatives |
| 71 | + |
| 72 | +### Use the shortcode as the `key` |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | +This is what was proposed by |
| 75 | +[MSC3746](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3746/). The |
| 76 | +problem with this is that there could possibly be multiple distinct images with |
| 77 | +the same shortcode. Reactions are only deduplicated based on `key`, so clients |
| 78 | +and servers would group these distinct reactions together which is undesirable. |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +### Put the `shortcode` as a key within `m.relates_to` |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +Instead of being at the root of the `content` dictionary, the `shortcode` value |
| 83 | +could be included within `m.relates_to`. This is the wrong place to put this |
| 84 | +value because `m.relates_to` is meant to only contain information pertaining to |
| 85 | +the relationship between events, not information about the reaction event |
| 86 | +itself. |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | +## Security considerations |
| 89 | + |
| 90 | +### Image is unencrypted |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +Reaction events are not encrypted, and so the MXC URI referenced by the key |
| 93 | +would have to be an unencrypted image. However, this is probably not a problem |
| 94 | +for the following reasons: |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +- Custom reactions are most likely not sensitive information. |
| 97 | + |
| 98 | +- Users are already able to upload unencrypted content into encrypted rooms, so |
| 99 | + this does not introduce any leakage that was not previously possible. |
| 100 | + |
| 101 | +- Clients can add UX to indicate to users that the reaction images are not |
| 102 | + encrypted. |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | +## Unstable prefix |
| 105 | + |
| 106 | +Until this proposal is merged into the spec, the `shortcode` key should be |
| 107 | +prefixed with `com.beeper.mscXXXX.`. |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +An unstable prefix for the `key` in `m.relates_to` is not necessary as the spec |
| 110 | +already allows arbitrary data to be used as the `key`. This MSC merely adds |
| 111 | +extra meaning to a specific class of key. |
0 commit comments