[jdev] Re: XHTML-IM XEP implementation
gnauck at ag-software.de
Thu Jan 4 13:14:20 CST 2007
i agree that it's a bad idea for chat messages.
But i talked to many people who want to send type='normal' in HTML like
email. And in email there is also no restriction of allowed tags.
I personally don't care much about XHTML and still try to send 99% of my
email in plain text only.
I agree with Peter that somebody who requests this feature should write
up an XEP. I would like prefer smth which allows multipart messages with
different content types where plain text is always required. Content
types could be plain text, xhtml, rtf etc...
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> So many times people have brought this up, but at no time has anyone
> written up a spec for it. I wonder why?
> Do you want to include *all* XHTML content? Scripts? Media objects? Forms?
> If so, feel free to write up a spec for that. To me, it seems like a bad
> JD Conley wrote:
>> We (especially Chris Mullins) also brought this up many many many many
>> many many many times during the experimental stages of this XEP....
>> Of course, there is nothing stopping you from creating a XHTML-Body XEP
>> that allows free form...
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: jdev-bounces at jabber.org [mailto:jdev-bounces at jabber.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Alexander Gnauck
>>> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:12 AM
>>> To: jdev at jabber.org
>>> Subject: [jdev] Re: XHTML-IM XEP implementation
>>> Hi Tomasz,
>>> i brought up this discussion multiple times in the past.
>>> As you said creating the X-HTML is the biggest problem. Another
>>> is that we allow only a small subset of tags and attributes. There are
>>> toolkits which you can use to create (X)HTML, but the output is not
>>> valid according to the XEP. Which means to have to modify the output
>>> again to get XHTML which is valid according to the XEP.
>>> I used IE on Windows and Gecko on Linux which are the most common
>>> toolkits to display and create (X)HTML.
>>> I think we need another XEP which doesn't restrict the developers to
>>> only this small subset of tags. If we wanna move forward with
>>> then we need it.
More information about the JDev