Hyperlinks I think we shouldn't include; instead, just let the client > auto link things that look like URLs. > Naming them just adds the potential for abuse (eg. > [google.com](https://malwaresite.example.com)). >
I'm firmly against imposing limitations such as these on users. They can always check what website was opened by a browser. Also, named hyperlinks are a done deal, it works everywhere. For lists I don't really see a point in including markdown. The client > can still add a lists button and just add "1." or a center dot before > each item. No need for extra markup. > Likewise we can use CAPS instead of bold. Who needs those weitghted fonts? :) > > Media Modern messengers are capable to send various media, often > > presenting it as such. > > This isn't markdown and doesn't need to be a part of a markdown XEP in > my opinion. Markdown would be determining where in a message the media > is presented and how the text flows around it, but this is *very* > complicated and is hard to make work on all screen sizes. > Not really difficult. We've already made it, and it works great. I'm not talking, of course, about inserting media in <img> style html images in random areas of the text. No,only like what any whatsapp is capable of. However, I don't think it's beyond our capacity to make a decently looking text even if it WILL contain images within. If articles on Medium.com can look decently on both desktop and mobile, I see no reason to claim that it can't be done. > > Instead, in my mind, media should just be included using OOB, SIMS, or > a similar XEP and the client should show it near the message that it was > a part of. Clients might do this by putting the media before or after > the message in the same "bubble", or by having some sort of > "attachments" menu, but that's up to the individual client. Exactly how > the media is displayed isn't really important in the same way that where > exactly line breaks occur in the text during soft wrapping isn't all > that important. > Then you obviously missed the point of my proposal: to have a uniform approach to everything message. The needs of a modern messenger far exceed the simple 'markup' problem. I'd even say that markup is the least of modern messenger needs. Your suggestion is to basically stick to the same disparate patchwork of XEPs that already exists. So far, results of this approach are less than spectacular. I think it's time to test a different approach. -- Andrew Nenakhov CEO, Redsolution, Inc. https://redsolution.com <http://www.redsolution.com>
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
