On Thu, Oct 12, 2017, at 10:49, Sam Whited wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017, at 10:32, Jonas Wielicki wrote: > > TL;DR: I strongly prefer revising XHTML-IM to a more sane subset of XHTML > > This is missing the point and will not help. If people are breaking it > now because it's easier just to slap whatever the user sent in the DOM, > or because of subtle issues with their implementation, whitelisting, > etc. then restricting it more won't help, they'll still either do the > easy thing or have the exact same subtle issues.
Accidentally hit enter too quickly. I meant to add: That being said, I am not against further restricting this. We might as well clean up XHTML-IM as much as possible before obsoleting it so that existing implementations can be a tiny bit safer. —Sam _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
