Skip to content

MSC4193: Spoilers on Media #4193

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
16 changes: 16 additions & 0 deletions proposals/4193-spoilers-on-media.md
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implementation requirements:

  • Client sending spoilers
  • Client respecting spoilers

This comment was marked as duplicate.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cinny now both respects and supports sending spoilered images. (cinnyapp/cinny#2212)

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
# MSC4193: Spoilers on Media
This proposal aims to enhance the protocol with more ways to make other users feel comfortable while using the protocol.
Background
Matrix includes a way to add a spoiler to text, which hides the text from visibility without explicit user interaction to show the hidden text. However, there is no official way to do this with images.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The existing spoilers work on all message types that support formatted_body and org.matrix.custom.html.

To send spoilers clients MUST use the formatted_body and therefore the org.matrix.custom.html format, described above. This makes spoilers valid on any msgtype which can support this format appropriately.

Since 1.10 images actually fall into that category, too, through their media captions.

So with this proposal it's now possible to have an image itself be behind a spoiler with its caption behind another spoiler. This made me wonder if we'd need some form of UI guidance on how to treat this situation? For instance, should the spoilers be revealed together or separately?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd say that spoilers should be done separately.

Copy link
Contributor

@tcpipuk tcpipuk Sep 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd imagine most people would want to configure each separately, as the caption may tell people what is inside the image to help them know whether they want to view it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That sounds sensible and I think c1e9fb4 has addressed it accordingly.

## Proposal
Some other chat protocols, like Discord or Telegram, offer a way to hide potentially sensitive or triggering images in a way that requires the user to explicitly interact with it to show the image.

In events with an image, there will be an optional `m.spoiler` field as a boolean. If true, then clients should show a blurred version of the image. If not present, it will be assumed to be false. There will also be a `m.spoiler.reason` field as a text value that will optionally display text for why the image has a spoiler.
## Potential issues
A user with malicious intent may put something inappropriate in the reason field.
## Alternatives
One alternative is the [Spoilerinator](https://codeberg.org/cf/spoilerinator) tool.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would just clarify what this alternative does and the limitations of it.

From my brief look at it, it uses Matrix HTML to create an interactive/clickable dropdown to view the image.

The limitation of this compared to the MSC would be that not all clients implement HTML, and HTML on mobile clients isn't very good. Additionally this requires a multi-step process of copying the media URL / MXC URI and running this external tool, and most likely doesn't work in encrypted rooms.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've added a note about the limitations.

## Security considerations
None, hopefully.
## Unstable prefix
Until this is stable, clients should use `org.matrix.msc4193.spoiler` and `org.matrix.msc4193.spoiler.reason`.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

org.matrix is reserved for matrix.org, so you'll need to use something like your own domain for the unstable prefix.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've updated it to my Codeberg Pages site.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Usually it is fine to use org.matrix in a MSC if you'd like. Just include the MSC # in it.