[Standards] [STANDARDS] XEP-0394: too weak to replace XEP-0071

Tedd Sterr teddsterr at outlook.com
Fri Mar 16 20:11:19 UTC 2018


> This is true, however mostly these are quite coarse-grained. Extensions with lots of optional

> parts inside - I'm thinking about XEP-0060 for example - tend to end up with various interop issues.

I don't disagree with that, and I'm not suggesting 0394 turns into a mass of optional parts.

My argument is that forbidding the use of text colouring because some don't want to use it is not a good solution, and an alternative solution is that clients are free to ignore such formatting as is their choice. Those who want to use it can do so, and those who don't never have to see any evil formatting.

Quoting XEP-0394, section 2 (bullet 5):
  "Entities SHOULD be able to cherry-pick a subset of the markup which is suitable for their presentation (for example, a terminal-based client may support inline emphasis and strike through, but no block-level markup)."

This is no different to what I am suggesting.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20180316/d6793cbf/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list