[standards-jig] XHTML-IM (JEP-0071) and in-band images
tomek at smoczy.net
Thu Jan 8 11:16:16 UTC 2004
Richard Dobson wrote:
I've added AMP for the #inline image.
But I don't think it's the way to go.
In the proposed solution the sender determines if the picture should be
transfered via SI
or attaches it in the IOBJ. But it has no idea if the reciever would be
able to get it. (NAT)
There is no negotiation on the size of the IOBJ chunk.
I also would not like to introduce another type of large packet, that
servers have to take care about.
(Quota, Karma, etc.) We could stay with <data
It should be at the reciever discretion, to choose the metod (SI/IBB) of
getting the image.
I assume the client already implements SI -> IBB fallback for
filetransfer, so we don't have to
consider it in Inband Images protocol.
I would still advocate the generic Jabber File Transfer Protocol URL
format. It would be
usefull in more places than XHTML-IM.
EX: jftp://user@server/resource/file.ext ?
(slashes in resource to be considered :-) )
If the image is small enough (one IBB packet) it could be attached
directly with IBB
if we add 'type' attribute to <data/> packet (which might be usefull
<message type="chat" to="dest at example.com" from="src at example.com">
<body>Hello mate :)</body>
Hello mate <img src="sid:123456789">
<data xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/ibb' sid='123456789' seq='0'
<rule condition='deliver-at' value='stored' action='error'/>
<rule condition='match-resource' value='exact' action='error'/>
More information about the Standards