2017-12-05 11:47 GMT+01:00 Tobias Markmann <tmarkm...@googlemail.com>: > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Daniel Gultsch <dan...@gultsch.de> wrote: >> >> 2017-12-05 11:32 GMT+01:00 Tobias Markmann <tmarkm...@googlemail.com>: >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Daniel Gultsch <dan...@gultsch.de> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> 2017-12-05 9:16 GMT+01:00 Tobias Markmann <tmarkm...@googlemail.com>: >> >> > You can happily do so without implementing the whole Jingle File >> >> > Transfer >> >> > XEP, you simply need to support parsing/serialization of the Jingle >> >> > FT >> >> > file >> >> > element, which is there simply for the metadata. IMO it does not make >> >> > much >> >> > sense to duplicate this element again in every XEP that uses it. >> >> >> >> If that's true I find the wording »Thus a client supporting this XEP >> >> MUST implement Jingle File Transfer (XEP-0234) [2] and HTTP File >> >> Upload (XEP-0363) [4].« confusing to say the least. >> >> >> > >> > Yes. This is for improved interoperability, but not just because we use >> > the >> > Jingle FT file element. >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Also I noticed that thumbnails use BOB as a transfer method. I wonder >> >> how this goes along with the statelessness premise of the XEP. >> > >> > >> > According to https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0231.html#exchange : >> > >> >> If the data to be shared is particularly small (e.g., less than 1k), >> >> then >> >> the sender MAY send it directly by including a <data/> element directly >> >> in a >> >> <message/>, <presence/>, or <iq/> stanza. >> > >> > >> > So, if the SIMS message contains the data element for the thumbnail, the >> > SIMS message with the thumbnail remains stateless. >> >> If embedding the thumbnail directly into the message is the default >> mode - or how the XEP is supposed to work - maybe the wording and the >> examples should reflect that. > > > Yes it could need an example on that. >> >> >> Have you seen a 1KiB PNG image though? > > > 1KiB was probably a sensible idea 10 years ago, nowadays it would probably > be 10-20KiB JPEG or WebP.
WebP? Wait for the haters :) But yes I agree that a 5KiB JPEG or something like that will probably yield good enough results. Of course this depends on our requirements for a thumbnail but IMHO a very rough, very blurry image is enough. (Like the thumbnails in Whatsapp for example. Those are also pretty blurry.) However 10-20KiB is probably a bit much given the message overhead, the SIMS overhead and the base64 overhead. Some servers still have a stanza length limitation of 10000bytes (Maybe server developer can what the current defaults are) In any case; If embedding a JPEG below a certain size as a thumbnail directly into the message then the XEP should reflect this and recommended size and a file type. cheers Daniel _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
