Dave wrote: > Reply inline: > > - Dave > > Richard Dobson wrote: > >> [...]
> Any given client has ten million choices about how to implement emoticons > if you use something standard like HTTP IMG tags. [...] That's just a problem I think, those ten million choices. I want to be able to read my messages very fast and actually, emoticons can help me with it. Still, untill I know those ten million of choices... pff ... If I'm e.g. talking to a black metal guy, I'll probably receive a black heart, if I'm talking to an artist it will be some sort abstract graphic if I'm talking to... it will be ? The advantage from Daves system is that sb. can send an emoticon the way (s)he intended to! The problem is that it also is the disadvantage: what if e.g. sb. likes to have real big emoticons (he doesn't have to care that they are so big, he has a 21 inch monitor) so he sends those to me, but I actually hate them, they fill half of my (e.g.) 14 inch desktop! I'll need whole my monitor to have 1 chat! Maybe some will say that I can't prevent people from sending big images. No, because I can switch off (x)html (or the <img>-part only) and still be using the x-element or the colon method to have _my_ emoticons. Well, just some thoughts .m. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
