[standards-jig] NEW: XHTML IM (JEP-0071)

David 'TheRaven' Chisnall theraven at sucs.org
Tue Feb 18 02:07:58 UTC 2003


Peter,

I'm curious as to why we need to define a subset of XHTML other than 
XHTML Basic.  If XHTML Basic becomes more widely accepted, then I 
imagine that a number of components will be developed by the open source 
community that can be plugged into new clients for editing and 
displaying XHTML Basic with a minimum of effort.  If, on the other hand 
we define our own subset of XHTML then more custom renderers / editors 
are going to be required, increasing the complexity of coding a 
compliant client.  Anything that makes client development harder is 
going to slow the uptake of jabber, and so must be regarded as a Bad 
Thing (tm), so what is the reasoning behind this?

David

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>I've posted version 0.2 of this document with some further restrictions
>and a more complete description of the thinking behind it.
>
>http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0071.html
>
>Peter
>
>--
>Peter Saint-Andre
>Jabber Software Foundation
>http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
>
>On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I've written a new JEP that attempts to formalize the usage of XHTML
>>within the Jabber community:
>>
>>http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0071.html
>>
>>It's quite preliminary and requires much work in order to be fully
>>useful, but it's a start. So have at it! :)
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>--
>>Peter Saint-Andre
>>Jabber Software Foundation
>>http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Standards-JIG mailing list
>>Standards-JIG at jabber.org
>>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
>>
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Standards-JIG mailing list
>Standards-JIG at jabber.org
>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
>
>  
>





More information about the Standards mailing list