[Standards] IMML

Michal 'vorner' Vaner vorner at ucw.cz
Mon Sep 3 17:42:13 UTC 2007


Hello

On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 05:32:34PM +0200, Jonathan Chayce Dickinson wrote:
> What you said is very true Michal, but you haven't taken it one step back.
>
> If the truth be told, these clients are processing XML. The sooner they 
> wake up and smell the coffee and use a proper XML processing framework 
> instead of shoddy home-grown ones, the better. There are plenty frameworks 
> out there, just plug-n-play...

<joke>
Would you be so kind and plug-n-playd me one in mcabber, please? ;-)
</joke>

> XML stands for eXtensible Markup Language, note the 'extensible', you 
> should be able to add to it without worry for backward compatibility. The 
> fact that their client can not support extra attributes is, in reality, a 
> *bug*.

Sure, I know. It is. Bugs are everywhere :-(.

But, as you noticed, you probably need a home-grown XML syntethyzer,
since you are not allowed to put many other things into the XML stream
(like processing instructions). And you need at last to modify that one
to handle attributes in different namespace than their tag. They need to
generate and place XML namespace prefixes there, remember them, atc.

As I said, your way is 100% valid and correct. But I just think the way
with separate tag will cause in less effort implementing it. Is there
any advantage in your way? If there is, I have no objections using it.

-- 
When all else fails, EAT!!!

Michal 'vorner' Vaner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20070903/e8675f84/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list