Rocket.chat: Is it a room or is it a channel?

[fduraibi]

I think in Rocket Chat we use three words to mean the same thing Room, Channel and Group.

Group is used with private groups, Channel is used almost everywhere else and Room is used in few locations (like Room Info button on the side bar of the channel)

This is a bit confusing and also more work for translators and I don't see the point of doing it like this.

I suggest renaming them to one unified term, and since Channel is the most used term then I suggest using it.
So we have Channels and Private Channels
And "Direct Message" doesn't need the word "Room" with it. e.g. "Create a new direct message room" can be "Start a new direct message" or simply "New direct message" otherwise I suggest using "Chat" instead, since room is usually used for groups and not one to one.

What do you guys think?

[djeber]

Direct messages should be private messages

[saymd]

I agree your suggestion.
When I was translating these words,
I was confued by the difference of the channel and public channel, also group and private group too.
In my understanding,
The "channel" is abbivation of the "public channel".
The "group" is abbivation of the "private group".
If it's OK, I would like to suggest renaming these likes below.
Create a new public channel => Create a new channel
Create a new private group => Create a new group

[engelgabriel]

Yes, it is confusing indeed, and I like your suggestions. We are planning to remove the "groups" in order to have only:
Channels: (can public or private, this is going to be just a property of the channel)
Users: (This may be more clear than direct or private messages?)

[rasos]

"Users" is not clearly saying that it means what is now the "Private chat".

We propose as a new wording:
Channels: for public channels and private groups
Chats: private 1:1 chats

[snowyu]

There are subtle differences between channel and group.

• Channel: 0 to n person. All messages need to keep for ever even if all people exists.
• Group: at least 2 to n person. remove the group and messages if all people are exists.
  
  
  
  • The chat could be a private 2 people group and could invite others to join.
  
  

[snowyu]

The room should be the name for developer or administrator:

Each Room could have these attriubtes:

• room type:
  
  
  
  • Channel
  
  
  • the _id is the '/' + channel name, it's global and unique.
  
  
  • Group
  
  
  • the _id is the creator name + '/' + group name.
  
  
  • allow the group owner to clear all message, archives, files
  
  
• room owners: could no owner or many owners
• privacy:
  
  
  
  • private: only invited to join.
  
  
  • verified: must verified via owner before join
  
  
  • public: all to join
  
  

The chat is always a prviate group. The _id is the creator name + '/' + the others name.

So the permissions are:

• change room type
• change room owner
• change room privacy
• send message
  
  
  
  • it could be use to mute user
  
  
  • or make read-only room(#825)
  
  
• upload file
• delete(revoke) latest message
• delete specified messages
• delete specified upload files
• clear messages(delete all messages in the room)
• clear upload files(delete all files in the room)

[sampaiodiego]

@thiagosanchz have you ever thought about this? I think we need to somehow be consistent.

[MalloZup]

hi all ! So i was using the Rest-api for building an app with clojure and a library. ( https://github.com/MalloZup/missile).

Just for sharing my pov. as fresh-eyes to the API:

i felt the inconsistency between the room and the channels, e.g i'm also nto sure what is a room and what is a channel , to me from intuition without knowing the theory, looked the same ...:grin:

[Sing-Li]

New UI design are all following standardized terms for the various elements.

Overtime, we will make sure the documentation also matches this convention.

Code unfortunately, will remain as they are.