On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 7:14 AM, Georg Lukas <ge...@op-co.de> wrote: > Seriously though, avatars require a graphical display and additional > bandwidth, so they can't be implemented in certain situations (think > console clients, or the military 9k6 links mentioned here from time to > time). We shouldn't prevent these implementation from achieving "core > client" status.
It's just an informational set of compliance suites; if people *can't* implement them, obviously they won't. If the XSF were ever to do any sort of certification I'm sure they'd understand why a terminal client couldn't implement avatars. In the end it's not that important; it's just a set of recommendations to help make things more interoperable; if something is missing one or two for a legit reason, it's not the end of the world. Specifically for the IM suites I'm only really considering what consumers will want from a personal communication product; so it's not guaranteed to fit your business or government needs. Those things should just do whatever makes sense for their business or use case anyways. —Sam _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
