On 12 October 2017 at 19:43, Georg Lukas <ge...@op-co.de> wrote: > My primary use case of XHTML-IM is syntax-colored code, so what I wish > for is: > > - pre-formatted text > - different foreground colors > - bold, italics, underline >
So for this, I'm thinking we should go the snippets route. That is, these sorts of things just feel like overhead to put in an IM message. I'd also do the syntax highlighting locally in the receiving client. Different people highlight code differently, and the most important thing is undoubtedly consistency for the reader. > What I'd like to get rid of: > > - background colors (UX nightmare) > - full foreground color flexibility (I'd love to have a limited color > palette like XEP-0392, so we can have different colors that are all > well-readable, on dark and on light background) > - absolute font sizes (relative sizes are okayish, from a usability > point of view) > I'm not sure what the point of colours or font sizes are at all. Literally all I'd want for IM is *bold*, /italic/, and `code`. Oh, and emojis, but those are just unicode these days. I can be convinced into ```multi-line code```, though I'd rather go for snippets in many ways. I hereby promise a concrete proposal on these - it ought to handle a few other cases too. > What I also like is the explicit separation between the rich message and > the compat message. I'm aware that there are security implications, but > if we can solve those for LMC, we shouldn't have a problem with > XHTML-IM(2.0). One possible solution would be a pop-up on the rich > message, showing the plaintext body. I'm not convinced a split is at all wise. Dave, _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
