[standards-jig] message formatting (XHTML IM)

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Thu Jun 19 23:55:17 UTC 2003


On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 06:35:09PM -0400, Nathan Walp wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 05:05:27PM -0500, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Next question: Are there any changes people would like to see in 
> > JEP-0071? I found a few nits over breakfast the other day, and I know
> > the schema needs fixing. Do client developers think the range of 
> > element and attribute support is too broad, too narrow, just right?
> > Do we really need <cite/> and <div/> and <q/>? What about the style
> > properties? Your friendly neighborhood protocol geek would like to know.
> 
> I wouldn't mind seeing <hr /> added to the list, but it's not make or
> break.  I do however, have a problem with this line:

Yeah, I went back and forth on that. No strong feelings here. Personally
I think <cite/> and <q/> might be unnecessary, and <div/> might open a
whole can of worms (though the style properties are limited, so it might
be OK).

> Any other elements and attributes defined in XHTML 1.0 MUST NOT be
> generated or supported by a compliant implementation of XHTML IM.
>
> I think maybe they SHOULD NOT be generated, but what about people who
> write later JEPs for MathML et all?  Also, are we really going to
> mandate what they're allowed to support?  I've always liked the "be
> conservative in what you generate, liberal in what you accept" matra,
> myself.

I reiterate that if you want to send MathML (never knew it was so
popular!), write a new JEP for that. It's way out of scope for the
basics we're defining here.

> Also, can we put up for discussion how XHTML-IM relates to
> groupchat/MUC?

JEP-0045 saith:

   A compliant service should pass extended information (e.g., 
   an XHTML version of the message body) through to occupants 
   unchanged.

--stpeter




More information about the Standards mailing list