-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/12 5:41 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Peter Saint-Andre
stpe...@stpeter.im wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/12 12:21 AM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
I agree with that sentiment.
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Peter Saint-Andre stpe...@stpeter.im wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/12 12:21 AM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
I agree with that sentiment. Green-colored text and strange fonts
were popular when MySpace was popular. This is something
I agree with that sentiment. Green-colored text and strange fonts were
popular when MySpace was popular. This is something from the past, not
the present or future.
The present and future require semantic elements (such as
blockquote/) and attributes (such as those used by RDFa).
Cheers,
Andreas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/12 12:21 AM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
I agree with that sentiment. Green-colored text and strange fonts
were popular when MySpace was popular. This is something from the
past, not the present or future.
The present and future require
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/12/12 7:53 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 10/12/12 4:07 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 10/11/2012 10:23 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/27/12 5:32 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
(I also wonder why we don't support q/ for inline
On 10/11/2012 10:23 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/27/12 5:32 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 7/31/12 6:43 PM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
I am also not sure about the strong/ and blockquote/
elements: they are shown as a recommended element to support
(7.8), but the business rules (8.7)
On 10/12/12 4:07 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 10/11/2012 10:23 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/27/12 5:32 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 7/31/12 6:43 PM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
I am also not sure about the strong/ and blockquote/
elements: they are shown as a recommended element to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/27/12 5:32 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 7/31/12 6:43 PM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
I am also not sure about the strong/ and blockquote/
elements: they are shown as a recommended element to support
(7.8), but the business rules (8.7) states
Hello!
28.09.2012, 16:23, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
On 09/28/2012 06:35 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Another bigger problem is smilies. It's not obvious when the
client should render smilies and when not. I'd prefer to forbid any
text-based smilies in the XHTML-IM content
Some
On 10/01/2012 11:18 PM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
Hello!
Hello Konstantin,
28.09.2012, 16:23, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
On 09/28/2012 06:35 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Another bigger problem is smilies. It's not obvious when the
client should render smilies and when not. I'd
On 10/01/2012 11:18 PM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
Hello!
Hello Konstantin,
28.09.2012, 16:23, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
On 09/28/2012 06:35 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Another bigger problem is smilies. It's not obvious when the
client should render smilies and when not. I'd
Sorry for the double, please consider this message as wrong.
On 10/08/2012 11:36 PM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 10/01/2012 11:18 PM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
Hello!
Hello Konstantin,
28.09.2012, 16:23, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
On 09/28/2012 06:35 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Hello, Sergey
08.10.2012, 20:40, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
Sorry for the double, please consider this message as wrong.
On 10/08/2012 11:36 PM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
The only solution I see is adding special considerations for smilies. The
smilies should be converted to some
Hello!
2. img / element with src attribute, containing URL with special scheme
(eg. smilie:), whith path, containing properly escaped textual
representation of the smilie.
Don't know how complicated a process of inventing a new URI schema is.
But I actually think that we can use real
On 10/09/2012 12:04 AM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
Hello!
1. img / element without src attribute at all, which alt attribute
contains textual representation of the smilie, so translator either
translate it and display smilie image, or display alternative text if it
cannot translate (or
Hello, Sergey!
09.10.2012, 00:59, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org:
On 10/09/2012 12:04 AM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
Well, I don't see any incompatibility with XHTML here.
src attribute is required for img tag in XHTML:
xs:element name=img
xs:complexType
On 09/28/2012 06:35 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 9/27/12 9:49 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 09/27/2012 09:38 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 8/22/12 2:13 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhild...@cisco.com wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew
On 09/27/2012 09:45 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 8/1/12 3:32 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
Sergey, thanks for the feedback.
Surely, You are always welcome, I am back from my vacation and can
continue my work :) Thank you too for your work.
3. Is the text of XEP-0071 clear and unambiguous?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/22/12 2:13 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhild...@cisco.com wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew Miller
linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/1/12 3:32 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
Sergey, thanks for the feedback.
3. Is the text of XEP-0071 clear and unambiguous? Are more
examples needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST)
appropriate? Have developers found the text
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/1/12 3:42 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
Hello.
On 08/01/2012 07:43 AM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
I am also not sure about the strong/ and blockquote/
elements: they are shown as a recommended element to support
(7.8), but the business rules
On 09/27/2012 09:38 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 8/22/12 2:13 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhild...@cisco.com wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew Miller
linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/27/12 8:52 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 8/1/12 3:42 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 08/01/2012 07:43 AM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
There is the matter of the img/ tag that accepts a
data:base64 as a src, leading to very big stanzas. I think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks for your feedback. Comments inline.
On 7/31/12 6:43 PM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
Is the text of XEP-0071 clear and unambiguous? Are more examples
needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST)
appropriate? Have developers found the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/27/12 9:49 AM, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 09/27/2012 09:38 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 8/22/12 2:13 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhild...@cisco.com wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew
On 08/22/2012 02:31 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
Or suggest to change *this* to strongthis/strong or
strong*this*/strong.
No, the thing is that a client changes this:
*this*strongthat/strong
in the *incoming* message to this:
strongthis/strongstrongthat/strong
which is obviously
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM, then any other rich text
transform ought to be disabled/bypassed.
- - mm
Matthew A. Miller
http://goo.gl/LK55L
On Aug 22, 2012, at 02:35, Sergey Dobrov wrote:
On 08/22/2012 02:31 AM, Joe
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew Miller linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM, then any other rich text
transform ought to be disabled/bypassed.
What about URLs that are not in a/ elements?
--
Joe Hildebrand
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 22, 2012, at 13:56, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew Miller linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM, then any other rich text
transform ought to be disabled/bypassed.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Matthew Miller
linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
What about URLs that are not in a/ elements?
Frankly, too bad so sad. The sender really ought to have put them in
anchors in the first place.
It seems some XHTML-IM clients seem to URL-ize links that are not
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
jhild...@cisco.com wrote:
On 8/22/12 10:33 AM, Matthew Miller linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
I agree with Sergey. If you received XHTML-IM, then any other rich text
transform ought to be disabled/bypassed.
What about URLs that are
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Mark Rejhon marky...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Matthew Miller
linuxw...@outer-planes.net wrote:
What about URLs that are not in a/ elements?
Frankly, too bad so sad. The sender really ought to have put them in
anchors in the first
Or suggest to change *this* to strongthis/strong or
strong*this*/strong.
On 8/21/12 2:57 AM, Sergey Dobrov bin...@jrudevels.org wrote:
Btw, often implementation of XHTML-IM conflicts with internal
hyperlinks/smiles/plain text formatting like *this*. Maybe it will be
useful to add recommendation
On 08/01/2012 03:58 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
At its meeting on July 25, 2012, the XMPP Council agreed to issue a
Call for Experience regarding XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM), in preparation for
perhaps advancing this specification from Draft to Final in the XSF's
standards process. To help the
Hello.
On 08/01/2012 07:43 AM, Mathieu Pasquet wrote:
I am also not sure about the strong/ and blockquote/ elements: they
are shown as a recommended element to support (7.8), but the business
rules (8.7) states that they should not be used, but rather span/ or
p/ with appropriate style
On 7/31/12 2:58 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
If you have any comments about advancing XEP-0071 from Draft to Final,
please provide them by the close of business on Friday, August 31, 2012.
Section 12.4 of XEP-0071 (version 1.4) reads in full:
###
12.4 W3C Review
The XHTML 1.0 Integration
Is the text of XEP-0071 clear and unambiguous? Are more examples
needed? Is the conformance language (MAY/SHOULD/MUST) appropriate? Have
developers found the text confusing at all? Please describe any
suggestions you have for improving the text.
7.6 states that the style attribute MUST be
37 matches
Mail list logo
