[Standards] Marking up messages with metadata and XEP-0071
dave at cridland.net
Fri Apr 10 16:01:21 UTC 2015
On 9 April 2015 at 23:24, Ben Langfeld <ben at langfeld.me> wrote:
> On 9 April 2015 at 16:58, Florian Schmaus <flo at geekplace.eu> wrote:
>> On 09.04.2015 18:59, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>> > Florian, my concerns with your approach are twofold:
>> > 1. It is complicated and is not markup in the sense that is used by XML,
>> > HTML, SSML, etc. Being abstracted means a complicated association step.
>> Yep, it's more complicated then just adding another attribute to an
>> element surrounding text.
>> Not sure what's the issue with it being not markup. In my eyes that's an
>> advantage here.
> It is, conceptually, metadata for marking up part of the text body. I'm
> not sure what the motivation is for avoiding this idea.
It does mean you can have a plain-text body, which is quite nice; but I
think one could decide that any jid-like "word" was in fact a jid and fetch
vCard data for it, rendering it as the name, etc - with false positives for
email, and so on, of course.
In other words, I might type:
I talked to Romeo today.
My client might note "Romeo" matched one of my contacts, and suggest I
meant "Romeo Montague". I affirm, and the message as sent is:
I talked to romeo at montague.example today.
A smart(ish) client then get vCard data and renders:
I talked to [Romeo Montague] today.
Rendering Romeo Montague as a hyperlink, perhaps with a tooltip (or
similar) with the avatar, jid, and so on.
This uses no markup (and no additional inlined metadata), and no
negotiation is required, but it's reliant on heuristics. Sending:
Romeo's email address is romeo at hotmail.example
... might confuse things; luckily it must be very rare that an email
address has an identical-looking jid used by someone else.
On the plus side, caching would work well here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards