13 Mar
2026
13 Mar
'26
9:40 a.m.
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 13:49:30 +0100
Maxime Buquet <pep(a)bouah.net> wrote:
I guess that's where we disagree. As a receiving
implementation, why
would you have to display an "implementation detail" from another
client? You can't actually remove that implementation detail if you
feel it should not be displayed in your client, as you do not
understand it.
As a receiving entity, I see three potential options upon receiving an
arbitrary mention, regardless of its format:
1. Stylise mention with text as-is
2. Acquire user's name and replace the text with that
3. Attempt to parse the mention's text for post-processing
Only the last one expects any level of understanding of the mention's
text, but it is unclear to me why one would do that. Nonetheless, the
recommendation at least gives confidence that you need only parse
within the range, and never without.
It also occurs to me that our ideas are not mutually opposed. I can
just do like:
1. "Entities SHOULD strip processing characters before sending"
2. "If sent anyways, they SHOULD be included in the range"