[Standards-JIG] reviving JEP-0038: Iconstyles

Kevin Smith kevin at kismith.co.uk
Mon May 2 22:39:49 UTC 2005


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2 May 2005, at 20:28, Hal Rottenberg wrote:
>>> Perhaps there should be two lists of icons. One Informational and the
>>> other Required?
>> I don't see any advantage in making certain emoticons "required" at 
>> all.  The
>> way I see it, it can only degrade functionality.
> We'll put a SHOULD in the JEP...

After just writing a very long mail *against* a SHOULD in the JEP, I've 
deleted it and written another one *for* it. I'm back to against it 
again. Sure, we can provide a nice long list in the JEP of emoticons 
clients should support but unless we also define an exchange mechanism 
for unknown emoticons, it doesn't solve any problems, there'll still be 
people out there receiving a message that looks like "I :heart: you 
(f)" because the sender happens to have installed that emoticonset, and 
we didn't define (f) as a flower in the JEP.

So yes, the problem of what to do when emoticon sets don't match is 
worthy of address but no, attempting to define a core, or 
all-encompassing set, is not the way of doing it, imo, ymmv, etc etc.

/K

- --
Kevin Smith
Psi Jabber client maintainer (http://psi.affinix.com/)
Taekwon-do club captain, University of Exeter
Postgraduate Research Student, Computer Science, University Of Exeter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCdqw5eZW+oiKW71URAtTqAJ9dudPGEJHnu8uNHr0O3KflMfnYhQCgkz6s
QX3H1tt50ulcuZvD9kw7oRg=
=4b1R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




More information about the Standards mailing list