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, 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 a subset of XHTML markup suitable for IM. This
should be sufficient, don't you think?
No, for the reasons I specify in my text.
XEP-71 is XHTML-IM, not XHTML. It is a reduced set of markup meant for IM,
with security in mind, and this is essentially what you are proposing.
If your ideas have merit, then how about we apply them against XEP-71? For
example, if we don't want hyperlinks that trick you, we could require that
all <a> hrefs have matching uri and child text in XEP-71.
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
then I have no objections. I think clients can effectively do that via
XEP-0071. The baseline requirements are pretty minimal:
http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0071.html#profile-summary
If people want something even more minimal and texty, they could simply
use Textile or some other lightweight text formatting approach:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_lightweight_markup_languages
It seems that lots of Jabber clients already support things like *bold*
and /italic/ and _underline_ so perhaps that is enough...
/psa
The impression I got about what Alex described on jdev was that he
wanted a way to completely separate the content from markup/other
rendering attributes (and that he wanted a much more simpler markup ...
I am not touching on that here :) ).
My impression was that this was already so for most of the case in
XHTML-IM, except for the usual implicit rendering which happens -
namely, use of _, /, *, emoticon (offhand, I cant think of anything else).
The first three already have tags within IM-XHTML, 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 ?
Regards,
Mridul
