[standards-jig] message formatting (XHTML IM)
julian at jabber.org
Fri Jun 20 00:03:33 UTC 2003
On Thursday, Jun 19, 2003, at 18:35 US/Eastern, 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
> 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:
> 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,
My interpretation was that MathML will *not* be a subset of XHTML IM.
This XHTML IM JEP is related to MathML only in that a future MathML JEP
may want to go along the lines of the XHTML IM JEP. Maybe in the future
there could be MathML embedded in the XHTML IM as well, but for now I
think we should deal with them separately. I dunno.
> Also, can we put up for discussion how XHTML-IM relates to
I think that's up to the MUC JEP to decide. :) I think it would make
sense that a disco request to the room returns whether it wants XHTML
messages or not. It would work fine with the existing XHTML IM JEP in
that a disco request needs to be sent first.
More information about the Standards