What about using a proper XEP like SIMS
(https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0385.html) for that case?
This look like a hack to me.
Le 06/03/2019 à 22:05, Georg Lukas a écrit :
* Tedd Sterr <teddst...@outlook.com> [2019-03-06 21:30]:
Naysayers are invited to comment now, or forever hold their piece.
because I love to be the naysayer, here is one:
"Modern" clients are using a small subset of XEP-0066, namely §3, to
communicate inline images in messages. A small subset of those clients,
furthermore, requires the <url> value to be equal to the message <body>
for this to work, apparently to enforce compatibility with legacy
clients.
Example 1: "Modern" Use of OOB for Inline Images
<message from='co...@chat.shakespeare.lit/secondwitch' type='groupchat'>
<body>https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg</body>
<x xmlns='jabber:x:oob'>
<url>https://xmpp.org/theme/images/xmpp-logo.svg</url>
</x>
</message>
While XEP-0066 is less than ideal for the purpose of embedding images,
and the body=url requirement isn't written down anywhere, it is
something that client developers should know about, at least to
implement it on the receiving side.
Georg
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org
_______________________________________________
