Open Letter to Meta #1495

ralphm · 2025-02-28T11:47:19Z

This adds an Open Letter to Meta, regarding true messaging interoperability w.r.t. to the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA).

ralphm · 2025-02-28T11:53:47Z

Note to reviewers: the XSF Board has decided to publish an send this Open Letter to Meta, authored by @mremond. It is accompanied by a detailed technical briefing. I added some custom navigation to collect relevant information in one place. As we want to make sure we communicate this in a coordinated effort, please review this on both the layout and (just) linguistic textual errors.

I have not (yet) linked this from anywhere, so probably we need a short blog post to go with it, which I will author, too. Possibly we should have a section for "press releases" or the likes, which this might be grouped under (instead?).

mwild1

👍 Some small suggestions inline. I have not reviewed the layout/presentation aspect.

content/about/open-letter-meta-dma/technical-briefing.md

Co-authored-by: Matthew Wild <[email protected]>

Rate limits are not a negative in general Co-authored-by: Matthew Wild <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: Matthew Wild <[email protected]>

guusdk · 2025-02-28T13:28:09Z

For your reviewing pleasure, this is a screenshot of the rendered page (based on commit 2ad60b0 ).

Apart from creating a new section called something like 'press releases', as @ralphm suggested, where this letter could be linked from permanently, we should consider linking it temporarily on the home page. For that, I suggest using the banner that we also use to promote upcoming events.

Screenshot of the letter

guusdk · 2025-02-28T13:30:25Z

Screenshot of the technical brief

guusdk · 2025-02-28T13:35:39Z

I'm far from a layout expert, but I'd suggest making these changes:

Adjust font size or wording so that headings fit on one line
Make headings more distinct. In the screenshot below, the header "Key Concerns ..." and "1. Restrictive Access..." look to similar
Have more white space between headings and text

What are those two ** in this heading?

Use less bold text. Using bold text to emphasize stuff looses its value if significant parts of the text are being emphasized. To me, it's equivalent of someone chatting in all caps.

guusdk · 2025-02-28T13:41:24Z

And, very subjectively: in this font, the distinction between bold text and non-bold text is not enough of a distinction. It makes for a very uncomfortable read. Can it be made bolder (or possibly use a different representation for emphasis, like italics)?

guusdk · 2025-02-28T13:45:11Z

On the letter page itself, consistently use comma's in this list (either use them for each item, or for none of them).

Could we include something that resembles an old-fashioned signature here, to give the letter a bit more the feel of being an actual letter?

ralphm · 2025-02-28T14:47:30Z

@guusdk thanks for that feedback. I looked into the styling of headings (margins, size, and weight), but this is a combination of the defaults for bootstrap and some custom overrides. I am hesitant to change any of this, because it would affect the entire site. I did remove superfluous bolding of two titles (including those double stars), and am looking at adding spacing for two consecutive headings.

As for the commas, each of those items is a sentence, and they just seem to make sense for some but not the others, unless we reword the who thing. I was hoping we didn't have to wordsmith this too much.

The signature is an good idea. Not sure if it is needed, but I'll think about how to best do this.

content/about/open-letter-meta-dma/_index.md

dwd · 2025-03-02T16:49:11Z

content/about/open-letter-meta-dma/_index.md

+
+- **Enhanced privacy** by avoiding unnecessary data exposure.
+
+- **Scalability and flexibility**, ensuring long-term sustainability.


I'd change these to be "catchphrase: detail", so "Seamless Federation: Connecting users across providers, just like email or phone networks" and so on. I think it'll stand out better on the page, and mirror what's in the previous section better.

This also aligns with @guusdk's comment.

Apologies for being picky, but I think these need to match the capitalisation.

In 2265e6a.

I feel really bad, but capitals after the colon to match the previous list, please? Sorry!

content/about/open-letter-meta-dma/technical-briefing.md

dwd · 2025-03-02T17:10:05Z

content/about/open-letter-meta-dma/technical-briefing.md

+---
+title: "Detailed technical briefing: The Case for XMPP – Why Meta Must Embrace True Messaging Interoperability"
+layout: single_open_letter_meta_dma
+---


This briefing is very much aimed at an audience of the EU and press, rather than Meta, which it's frankly quite brutal about (though not incorrect). Would this be included in the letter as sent to meta?

I think we cannot separate them. The letter is too short for substance on its own, so the briefing goes into detail. Meta has the burden/privilege of being a (two-fold) gatekeeper in this area. The letter and briefing have to be seen in light of why the EU Commission has designated them as gatekeeper. The EU Commission created this situation by focusing the debate on market competition (hence Digital Markets Act), rather than looking to effects on users, and by restricting the current debate to instant messaging only. Advanced (but perceived as must-have by end-users) features like voice and video calling are due in about 2 years.

Hmmm... OK, I think I can work with this and suggest some edits on the technical briefing that will make it less of a bitter pill to swallow. The voice/video aspects are really interesting, since even if they're not covered by the regulations today they clearly will need to be in the future.

From the DMA, article 7:

2. The gatekeeper shall make at least the following basic functionalities referred to in paragraph 1 interoperable where the gatekeeper itself provides those functionalities to its own end users: (a) following the listing in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9): (i) end-to-end text messaging between two individual end users; (ii) sharing of images, voice messages, videos and other attached files in end to end communication between two individual end users; (b) within 2 years from the designation: (i) end-to-end text messaging within groups of individual end users; (ii) sharing of images, voice messages, videos and other attached files in end-to-end communication between a group chat and an individual end user; (c) within 4 years from the designation: (i) end-to-end voice calls between two individual end users; (ii) end-to-end video calls between two individual end users; (iii) end-to-end voice calls between a group chat and an individual end user; (iv) end-to-end video calls between a group chat and an individual end user.

With the designation on September 6 2023, the respective dates are a) March 6 2024, b) September 6 2025, and c) September 2027.

OK, so I'd like to include something somewhere along the lines of:

XMPP not only provides a well-deployed and understood plan for the immediate demands of one-to-one messaging, but a long term path that includes both groupchat and voice/video calls. Just as it would make little sense for Meta to demand anything but WebRTC as the basis for voice/video, we feel it makes little sense demanding anything but XMPP.

- Make solution benefits more consistent textually. - Flip WhatsApp and Messenger. - Highlight benefits on both sides in call-to-action.

guusdk · 2025-03-04T12:12:34Z

Screenshots based on commit be6b0a5

guusdk · 2025-03-04T12:43:43Z

If we want to facilitate these documents to be a discussion point within external organizations (meta, EU), then it would be good to make sure that it looks good when printed (on physical paper). When discussing things in a meeting, many people will still use such hard-copies.

Currently, the print (based on a preview on my laptop) of this page looks horrible. The side margins are very wide and the font size is so large that every page only contains a little text.

I think this can be improved a lot by using a print style sheet.

I have no practical experience, but I tried hacking in this very minimal set of style directives for printing, which already makes quite a difference.

@media print {
    .container, .container-lg, .container-md, .container-sm, .container-xl, .container-xxl {
        max-width: unset;
    }
    article p {
        font-size: 10pt;
    }
}

There are undoubtedly better ways to do this. Perhaps Bootstrap supports this, but even if that proves to be to much trouble: let's at least do the above.

mremond · 2025-03-04T12:50:24Z

Thanks for all the improvements !

dwd · 2025-03-04T13:07:04Z

Thanks for all the improvements !

Thanks for writing it, and spurring us into action!

dwd

I've tried taking the edge of some of the more antagonistic comments in the technical briefing, but it's tricky when they're all basically true. I've also added some suggestions around noting XMPP is a suitable interop choice when considering groupchat and calls; there's probably more we could do here and I think it makes the argument more compelling.

dwd · 2025-03-04T13:18:49Z