> I thought about it a bit (hmm, actually a lot ;) ) and I started to like > the idea. So to reduce the overhead the message could be sth. like: > > <message type="chat" to="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> > <body>This is a emoticon containing message :) (L) ;) :D</body> > <x xmlns="jabber:x:econ"> > <econ text="(L)" icon="luv"/> > <econ text=":)" icon="smile"/> > <econ text=";)" icon="wink"/> > <econ text=":D" icon="grin"/> > </x> > </message>
Yep also I think it can be shortened by a few more characters like this <message type="chat" to="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> <body>This is a emoticon containing message :) (L) ;) :D</body> <x xmlns="jabber:x:econ"> <econ txt="(L)" ico="luv"/> <econ txt=":)" ico="smile"/> <econ txt=";)" ico="wink"/> <econ txt=":D" ico="grin"/> </x> </message> > I should even make it shorter by omitting the smileys from the x element > because they explain themselves. In this example the overhead would be > reduced to 3/4!! So the example would be: > > <message type="chat" to="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> > <body>This is a emoticon containing message :) (L) ;) :D</body> > <x xmlns="jabber:x:econ"> > <econ text="(L)" icon="luv"/> > </x> > </message> Yep very good point, so only the non-obvious emoticons would be in the x element, but i also think that if there are emoticons in the message but no non obvious ones the message should be sent with an empty x element to signify that there are emoticons in the message to be replaced, e.g. <message type="chat" to="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" from="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> <body>This is a emoticon containing message :) ;) :D</body> <x xmlns="jabber:x:econ"/> </message> Richard _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
