>
> On Friday, April 6, 2001, at 09:44 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
>> As you can see there is support for <em> instead of the evil <i>,
>> <strong> instead of <b>, etc.
>
> Yes, although qualified with "this generally means..." and "most clients
> should recognize this as..." As I recall, there were always differences
> between how browsers interpreted these. But I suppose if everyone
> implementing HTML support in Jabber clients is cribbing from this
> particular document, they'll all interpret these tags the same way :-)
>
> Bold and italic are nice, but this still leaves open the issue of fonts,
> point sizes and colors. Otherwise it's a flashback to 1993 and Mosaic
> 1.0.
>
> At this point I'm planning to use <em> and <strong> but also use <u> and
> <font> as necessary. (And I'll parse <b> and <i> if I receive 'em.)
> Cellphones can just ignore them.
>
> —Jens
Wouldn't that make it invalid XML?
Hmm, this is an extract of the kind of thing the JabberIM client
(which just implemented sending of xhtml messages in the new version) sends:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<body>
<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt">
<b><i><u>test</u></i></b>
</span><br/>
</body>
</html>
Thomas Parslow (PatRat) ICQ #:26359483
Rat Software
http://www.rat-software.com/
Please leave quoted text in place when replying
_______________________________________________
jdev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
