[Standards] IMML

Rachel Blackman rcb at ceruleanstudios.com
Mon Aug 6 19:17:39 UTC 2007


> XHTML-IM is for sending HTML messages. IMML is for sending modern
> Instant Messages. IMML intentionally leaves out most of the  
> flexibility
> that XHTML-IM provides, most of which has no semantic meaning
> whatsoever. We might as well be using XSL-FO.
>
> Imposing rules such as you suggest for HTML a's just adds to the
> complexity of implementation, and illustrates that HTML in any form is
> simply the wrong tool for the job.

This is an argument that will never be resolved.  We have people who  
want to be able to put every single HTML object (including Java,  
Active X, DHTML and so on) into messages and feel XHTML-IM is far too  
restrictive and anemic; they argue you should be able to paste HTML  
in from Firefox and have it display exactly as it was.  And then we  
have people who feel XHTML-IM is too complex and is overkill for the  
situation.

XHTML-IM manages to strike a (somewhat sensible) middle ground, which  
is probably why it will stick around. :)

-- 
Rachel Blackman <rcb at ceruleanstudios.com>
Trillian Messenger - http://www.trillianastra.com/





More information about the Standards mailing list