[standards-jig] message formatting (XHTML IM)

Tijl Houtbeckers thoutbeckers at splendo.com
Thu Jun 19 15:55:15 UTC 2003

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> wrote on 19-6-2003 17:42:11:
>On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 11:08:44AM +0200, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:00:01PM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> > BTW, I'm also open to further simplifying XHTML IM if folks think 
>> > that's valuable (no images, etc.).
>> O don't think it would be good. I would rather see more 
>> extensibility with probably feature-negotiation or disco used to 
>> discover supported extensions (like MathML).
>If people want MathML, they will need to write another JEP, specify
>another namespace, and define a new subset. It ain't going in XHTML-IM.
>XHTML-IM is intended to be a simple approach that meets the needs of 
>80% of the people. MathML does not fit that description. ;)

It's ok to put that in a different JEP. I think the question more is, 
if support for MathML is disco'd, should it be allowed to embed the 
MathML into the XHTML part of the message, or should it be seperate? 

Tijl Houtbeckers
Software Engineer @ Splendo
The Netherlands

More information about the Standards mailing list