[Standards] IMML

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Mon Aug 6 17:38:20 UTC 2007


On Monday 06 August 2007 5:33 am, Alex Jones wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 20:05 -0700, Justin Karneges wrote:
> > On Sunday 05 August 2007 5:11 pm, Alex Jones wrote:
> > > Hi list
> > >
> > > I am intending to make an XEP of this. Is anyone interested in helping
> > > me, as I haven't really got a clue how to write a proper specification.
> > >
> > > http://spark.us.weej.net/~alex/temp/imml.html
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > XEP-71 (XHTML-IM), offers a subset of XHTML markup suitable for IM.  This
> > should be sufficient, don't you think?
>
> No, for the reasons I specify in my text.

XEP-71 is XHTML-IM, not XHTML.  It is a reduced set of markup meant for IM, 
with security in mind, and this is essentially what you are proposing.

If your ideas have merit, then how about we apply them against XEP-71?  For 
example, if we don't want hyperlinks that trick you, we could require that 
all <a> hrefs have matching uri and child text in XEP-71.

Is there a reason to want both XEP-71 and IMML, when they seem to have similar 
goals?  That's my question.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list