[standards-jig] Re: [formatting-jig] Message Body rendering conformance.
julian at jabber.org
Sun Jan 20 06:30:31 UTC 2002
Anyway, Jabber does not define how clients render things, that's
completely up to each client implementation.
Shawn Wilton wrote:
> Hey howdy. I had an idea and wanted to put it before
> the big shots. They told me to send it here. ;-)
> So the idea is this. We have a problem right now
> with how clients handle the rendering/formatting of
> the message body. Now I know about the xhtml spec and
> this has *nothing* to do with that. If you want bold,
> italicism, etc. then you should use the xhtml. No,
> what I'm talking about are things like the irc tags
> and emoticons. Now when I go to use the aim or the
> msn system, etc. then I get a consist look and feel
> in the formatting of a message. I know what the other
> person is going to see when i send them something.
> Unfortunately we do not yet have this sort of
> congruence in jabber and I think this only hurts us.
What about text clients, SMS clients? We cannot define any standards for
this stuff, we can only make suggestions. That is a strength because
people can be new and innovative if they want to.
> Here's what I propose:
> We need a system. A system that clients can implement
> that gives all of us a similar format to work with.
> 1. We need emoticons. These should be smileys, winks,
> etc. and they need to be free (BSD lisenced icons).
> For these emoticons we also need standard maps
> from text -> graphic that people can use in their
We could suggest some standard maps from text -> graphic, but that's
about it. Suggest. We cannot say anyone has to implement anything with
regards to this.
> 2. We need a standard list of irc like tags. As it
> stands, almost all clients implement /me for example.
> I would also propose others for standard convenience.
> /c for close, /subject for a subject change, and
> anything else people can think of.
This is even more client-side than emoticons. I would argue that the
only ones we should define are ones which actually get sent to other
clients, such as /me. "/subject" is never actually sent in a message --
the client handles it client-side. Same with /c. These are *client*
commands, not Jabber protocol things.
> Now this would all be optional of course since we can't
> and don't want to force people to use a system they
> don't care for. But atleast then we have set of standards
> and free for use icons to work off of.
Right, but like I said the best you could do is suggest. Not
standardize. Feel free to go forward and make an emoticon suggestion JEP
and a /command suggestion JEP - but make them separate, since I'm more
willing to fight the /command stuff :)
email: julian at jabber.org
jabber:julian at jabber.org
More information about the Standards