[Standards] Call for Experience: Advancement of XEP-0071 (XHTML-IM) to Final

Kozlov Konstantin yagiza at yandex.ru
Tue Oct 9 02:11:03 UTC 2012

Hello, Sergey!

09.10.2012, 00:59, "Sergey Dobrov" <binary at jrudevels.org>:

>  On 10/09/2012 12:04 AM, Kozlov Konstantin wrote:
>>   Well, I don't see any incompatibility with XHTML here.
>  src attribute is required for img tag in XHTML:
>   <xs:element name="img">
>      <xs:complexType>
>        <xs:attributeGroup ref="attrs"/>
>        <xs:attribute name="src" use="required" type="URI"/>

Ok, IC.

>>>>    2. <img /> element with "src" attribute, containing URL with special scheme (eg. "smilie:"), whith path, containing properly escaped textual representation of the smilie.
>>>   Don't know how complicated a process of inventing a new URI schema is.
>>>   But I actually think that we can use real images with alternate text
>>>   which contains text smile representation.
>>   Well... this way just breaks the main advantage of text-based smilies: low traffic. Why do we need smilies at all, if we can just send embedded images anyway?
>  Actually, I don't think that it's required to say about lightweight when
>  talking about XHTML-IM ;) These clients that don't want to retrieve much
>  data from the network can just hide xhtml-im from their disco-features.

To tell the truth, XHTML-IM doesn't mean high traffic consumption at all. Bot XML and HTML code are compressed even better than plain text because of a lot of repeating elements. Unlike Base64-encoded data, which is almost incompressible.

With my best regards,

More information about the Standards mailing list