Re: [Standards] IMML

Well, ignore my message... I thought we were in a element, but we aren't. Le lundi 10 septembre 2007, Olivier Goffart a écrit : > Le lundi 10 septembre 2007, Tomasz Sterna a écrit : > > It was brought on a list but I will repeat it: > > It WILL break existing client. > > > > HTML-like way of th

Re: [Standards] IMML

Le lundi 10 septembre 2007, Tomasz Sterna a écrit : > It was brought on a list but I will repeat it: > It WILL break existing client. > > HTML-like way of thinking will not work here because message stanza is > not HTML. > > Let me rewrite your example (skipping the attributes and adding newlines >

Re: [Standards] IMML

Dnia 10-09-2007, Pn o godzinie 10:46 +0200, Jonathan Chayce Dickinson napisał(a): > I just thought, we could do something along the lines of Microformats, > e.g: > > Hello, :D. > > Where 'rel' signifies that it is an emoticon and 'title' is the parent > of the emoticon (the fall-back). Seems to w

Re: [Standards] IMML

I just thought, we could do something along the lines of Microformats, e.g: Hello, :D. Where 'rel' signifies that it is an emoticon and 'title' is the parent of the emoticon (the fall-back). Seems to work pretty well and I don't think it will break existing clients... Michal 'vorner' Vaner w

Re: [Standards] IMML

Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: Hello *snip* But, as you noticed, you probably need a home-grown XML syntethyzer, since you are not allowed to put many other things into the XML stream (like processing instructions). And you need at last to modify that one to handle attributes in different namesp

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 05:32:34PM +0200, Jonathan Chayce Dickinson wrote: > What you said is very true Michal, but you haven't taken it one step back. > > If the truth be told, these clients are processing XML. The sooner they > wake up and smell the coffee and use a proper XML processing

Re: [Standards] IMML

Along those lines, the preserve tag should maybe have the following modes: * text - don't do something like emoticons or automatic spelling correction * whitespace - don't remove whitespace * all - preserve both text and whitespace. * none - do what you see fit to the text (defau

Re: [Standards] IMML

What you said is very true Michal, but you haven't taken it one step back. If the truth be told, these clients are processing XML. The sooner they wake up and smell the coffee and use a proper XML processing framework instead of shoddy home-grown ones, the better. There are plenty frameworks o

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 04:42:39PM +0200, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > different language and you can not do that without namespace prefixes. Sorry, not language. Namespace… -- Work with computer has 2 phases. First, computer waits for the user to tell it what to do, then the user wa

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 04:18:29PM +0200, Jonathan Chayce Dickinson wrote: > > > (SomeClassInAStrangeProgrammingLanguage: > {SomeMethod: > Console:P("The console print method."); > :} > :) > > This one is nice. But, the preserve attribute would need to be

[Standards] IMML

Hey, The IMML thread seems to have gone dead. How about the following: That was fun! :D. Thanks for the good time beer. The above would allow programs to correctly display an emoticon even if they don't have that one in their 'dictionary'. For example, let's assume the program doesn'

Re: [Standards] IMML

Dnia 14-08-2007, wto o godzinie 18:45 +1000, Daniel Noll napisał(a): > Then again, another way to do it is render them hidden. It looks > mangled but > when you copy the text they will still go into the clipboard It would make the parts when the attribute was applied unnecessary (code parts, pat

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Wednesday 08 August 2007 08:01, Alex Jones wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 23:08 +0200, Tomasz Sterna wrote: > > Dnia 07-08-2007, wto o godzinie 21:45 +0100, Alex Jones napisał(a): > > > And this is exactly the problem. > > > > > > rsync -a /foo/ /bar/ > > > find -name "*foo*" > > > > Correct way

Re: [Standards] IMML - attribute tagging

Dnia 07-08-2007, wto o godzinie 10:18 +0200, Michal 'vorner' Vaner napisał(a): > But I think emphasis is too much for the protocol. Besides, I would do > backwards-compatible protocol (no other element besides xhtml and text, > why send third version of the text). Just an idea: > > > This is no

Re: [Standards] IMML

Ian Paterson wrote: > Alex Jones wrote: >> On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 13:21 +0100, Ian Paterson wrote: >> >>> Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>> If we just add another tag to explicitly mark emoticons - and remove the implicit rendering completely - then Alex's baseline requirements sho

Re: [Standards] IMML

Alex Jones wrote: By the way, how the sending client knows in is an emoticon? Many users I know just type them, not select from list. That's an application issue that can be tackled. In any event, rather the sender decide than the receiver. Yes. The sending user will see how her client i

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 16:02 +0200, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > Hello > > On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:28:53PM +0100, Alex Jones wrote: > > > Mridul Muralidharan wrote: > > > > If we just add another tag to explicitly mark emoticons - and remove > > > > the implicit rendering completely - then A

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:28:53PM +0100, Alex Jones wrote: > > Mridul Muralidharan wrote: > > > If we just add another tag to explicitly mark emoticons - and remove > > > the implicit rendering completely - then Alex's baseline requirements > > > should be done with IM-XHTML itself ? > >

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 13:21 +0100, Ian Paterson wrote: > Alex Jones wrote: > > This isn't about formatting, this is about getting rid of the guesswork. > > Similar problems arise in parsing out icons in the presence of things > > like regular expressions. Or maybe even regular chat: > > > > Count

Re: [Standards] IMML

Alex Jones wrote: This isn't about formatting, this is about getting rid of the guesswork. Similar problems arise in parsing out icons in the presence of things like regular expressions. Or maybe even regular chat: Count the screws (there should be 8) Incorrectly gets parsed out as Count the s

Re: [Standards] IMML

Top-posting discouraged, comments at the bottom. On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 12:04:25AM +0100, Alex Jones wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 14:56 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > Alex Jones wrote: > > > > > I don't see how XHTML-IM can support icon delimitation like IMML. I > > > really don't thin

Re: [Standards] IMML

>From XEP 38: * The client sends the message with the text string to the intended recipient. * The recipient client receives the message with the text string. IMML complements XEP 38. The "text strings" are explicitly delimited in IMML "icon" elements, rather than just fumbled into the me

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 23:08 +0200, Tomasz Sterna wrote: > Dnia 07-08-2007, wto o godzinie 21:45 +0100, Alex Jones napisał(a): > > And this is exactly the problem. > > > > rsync -a /foo/ /bar/ > > find -name "*foo*" > > Correct way of rendering these is to apply italic and bold, but do NOT > remo

Re: [Standards] IMML

Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Justin Karneges wrote: On Monday 06 August 2007 5:33 am, Alex Jones wrote: On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: Hi list I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping me,

Re: [Standards] IMML

Dnia 07-08-2007, wto o godzinie 21:45 +0100, Alex Jones napisał(a): > And this is exactly the problem. > > rsync -a /foo/ /bar/ > find -name "*foo*" Correct way of rendering these is to apply italic and bold, but do NOT remove the slashes and asterisks. -- Tomasz Sterna Xiaoka Grp. http://www.

Re: [Standards] IMML

Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Justin Karneges wrote: >> On Monday 06 August 2007 5:33 am, Alex Jones wrote: >>> On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: > Hi list > > I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone

Re: [Standards] IMML

Alex Jones wrote: > I don't see how XHTML-IM can support icon delimitation like IMML. I > really don't think we are talking about a subset of XHTML-IM. Emoticons are an entirely separate problem. Feel free to update XEP-0038 or convince others to do so: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0038.ht

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 13:23 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > IMHO that would be a good item to add to the security considerations in > XEP-0071. > > I think XHTML-IM pretty much does what IMML does, but in a W3C-friendly > manner. If people want to support an even more reduced subset of XHTML >

Re: [Standards] IMML

Justin Karneges wrote: > On Monday 06 August 2007 5:33 am, Alex Jones wrote: >> On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: >>> On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: Hi list I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping me, as

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 12:57:53PM +0100, Alex Jones wrote: > Personally, I sometimes find that plain text alone is not enough to > communicate effectively with people, especially when complicated > concepts like sarcasm are involved. Newspapers and typeset books > generally get away with us

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 18:28 +0200, Olivier Goffart wrote: > What about this: ? > > This is *not* a joke ;-) ; > > And client could interpret *bold* /italic/ or _underline_ > (even the average human could do that if the client doesn't support it) > a kind of simplified wi

Re: [Standards] IMML

Le mardi 7 août 2007, Alex Jones a écrit : > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 14:12 +0200, Matthias Wimmer wrote: > > Hi Alex! > > > > Alex Jones schrieb: > > > > > > This is not a joke > > > ;-) http://notajoke.org > > > What about this: ? This is *not* a joke ;-) ; And clien

Re: [Standards] IMML

The message IS backwards compatible! It is not, since no tag is included. It will be when stanza looks like: This is *not* a joke ;-) This is not a joke ;-) http://notajoke.org Or something like this. Also since the text element is not namespaced technically its illegal in

Re: [Standards] IMML

On 8/7/07, Alex Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This is not a joke ;-) > http://notajoke.org > > The message IS backwards compatible! It is not, since no tag is included. It will be when stanza looks like: This is *not* a joke ;-) This is not a joke ;-) http://notajoke.org

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 14:12 +0200, Matthias Wimmer wrote: > Hi Alex! > > Alex Jones schrieb: > > > > This is not a joke ;-) > > http://notajoke.org > > > > > > The beauty of this is that (specification permitting) if the client > > wishes to ignore the IMML markup and process the message as

Re: [Standards] IMML

Matthias Wimmer schrieb: In HTML this behaviour is defined, but XML is not HTML. You should not expect the Jabber clients to ignore these extra tags. They typically do parse the stanza and create some sort of a DOM like tree out of it. Depending on how they implemented it, I expect you will get

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hi Alex! Alex Jones schrieb: This is not a joke ;-) http://notajoke.org The beauty of this is that (specification permitting) if the client wishes to ignore the IMML markup and process the message as a traditional plain text message, it can. The message IS backwards compatible! This is exac

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hi Michal On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 10:18 +0200, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote: > Hello > > I'm for the marking of URL or emoticon (not that they would bother me > any more, I disabled emoticons completely and have just text, and urls at > last don't screw the message up). > > But I think emphasis is

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hello I'm for the marking of URL or emoticon (not that they would bother me any more, I disabled emoticons completely and have just text, and urls at last don't screw the message up). But I think emphasis is too much for the protocol. Besides, I would do backwards-compatible protocol (no other el

Re: [Standards] IMML

Robin Redeker schrieb: There is one big difference between XHTML-IM and IMML, which are simply a matter of semantic. XHTML-IM says how to exactly display a text, what color, what size, what padding, where to place an image, or whatever. IMML just says "display this with emphasis", "and this is an

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 12:17:39PM -0700, Rachel Blackman wrote: > >XHTML-IM is for sending HTML messages. IMML is for sending modern > >Instant Messages. IMML intentionally leaves out most of the > >flexibility > >that XHTML-IM provides, most of which has no semantic meaning > >whatsoever. We mi

Re: [Standards] IMML

XHTML-IM is for sending HTML messages. IMML is for sending modern Instant Messages. IMML intentionally leaves out most of the flexibility that XHTML-IM provides, most of which has no semantic meaning whatsoever. We might as well be using XSL-FO. Imposing rules such as you suggest for HTML a's

Re: [Standards] IMML

Hi XHTML-IM is for sending HTML messages. IMML is for sending modern Instant Messages. IMML intentionally leaves out most of the flexibility that XHTML-IM provides, most of which has no semantic meaning whatsoever. We might as well be using XSL-FO. Imposing rules such as you suggest for HTML a's

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Monday 06 August 2007 5:33 am, Alex Jones wrote: > On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: > > On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: > > > Hi list > > > > > > I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping > > > me, as I haven't really got

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: > On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: > > Hi list > > > > I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping > > me, as I haven't really got a clue how to write a proper specification. > > > > http://spar

Re: [Standards] IMML

On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote: > Hi list > > I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping > me, as I haven't really got a clue how to write a proper specification. > > http://spark.us.weej.net/~alex/temp/imml.html > > Thanks! XEP-71 (XHTML-IM), offers

[Standards] IMML

Hi list I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping me, as I haven't really got a clue how to write a proper specification. http://spark.us.weej.net/~alex/temp/imml.html Thanks! -- Alex Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>