[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0245 (The /me Command)
mwild1 at gmail.com
Wed Jan 7 22:10:24 UTC 2009
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:29 PM, XMPP Extensions Editor <editor at xmpp.org> wrote:
> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0245 (The /me Command).
> Abstract: This specification defines recommended handling of the /me command in XMPP instant messaging clients.
> URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0245.html
> This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on 2009-01-20.
> Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send your feedback to the standards at xmpp.org discussion list:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to clarify an existing protocol?
> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and requirements?
> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not?
N/A for a server.
> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?
No, except possibly in the note below.
> 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?
Yes. Nice and concise too :)
Something occurred to me the other day (and I was annoyed because I
thought this XEP finalised). Some clients struggle to agree about how
to handle /me at the same time as XHTML-IM. The main question is
whether they should send the /me message in XHTML as they would
present it ("* John does this") (often in another colour too), or
whether they send the unprocessed "/me does this" text.
When the latter, this requires receiving clients to process incoming
XHTML-IM messages for /me commands. Most clients also add their own
colour and style to actions, if they are to be consistent with
plaintext messages, but should these styles override the styles set by
I don't know what the best solution is, but I think it is quite
desirable to have some mention of this issue in the XEP, and a
More information about the Standards