[Standards] Inband Images

Mridul mridul at sun.com
Mon Mar 26 19:29:27 UTC 2007

Mridul wrote:
> Andreas Monitzer wrote:
>> On Mar 26, 2007, at 20:10, JD Conley wrote:
>>> Using iri's like this is ideal IMHO.... It's very html/http-like (aka 
>>> people are used to it) and leads to all kinds of interesting 
>>> possibilities.
>>> In our current implementation we use a long lived Inband-Bytestream 
>>> for conversations and send the whole message in an IBB with the image 
>>> encoded in-line. We call this a "DirectConnect" bytestream. It's a 
>>> profile on 0095 for sending very large stanzas (any stanza) out of 
>>> band from point to point.
>> Wouldn't it be easier to just use a data-url for the image? That 
>> already works with the current xhtml-xmpp spec.
>> (only for small images, though, but this would be ideal for emoticons)
>> andy
> I thought there was a recent note attached to the xhtml spec asking 
> clients to be careful of fetching remote content through img src ? :-)
> Mridul

Ouch, disregard this - I did not associate it with 2397 but thought it 
was a generic uri


More information about the Standards mailing list