Hey, The IMML thread seems to have gone dead.
How about the following: <html [...]> <body [...] xmlns:imml="org:alexj:imml">That was fun! <imml:icon parent=":-)">:D</imml:icon>. Thanks for the good time <imml:icon>beer</imml:icon>.
</body> </html>The above would allow programs to correctly display an emoticon even if they don't have that one in their 'dictionary'. For example, let's assume the program doesn't have the : D icon, that would then be translated into : - ). In the case of the <beer> emoticon, if it doesn't have it, it could write it in special formatting. I could even see a 'slick' client doing something like what I have attached. In any case these are /just/ emoticons, so I don't think all this effort isn't entirely necessary, but hey, it does make it all rather cool. A lot of people go for chat clients because of the 'cool' factor.
You would need a fixed set of 'parent' emoticons, that ALL clients should support.
And as for pasting something out of your source code, you really don't want the client putting emoticons in it once it gets to the other side (currently, there is no defined behaviour for that, they can put them into text or html, as they see fit, AFAIK). Maybe a preserve attribute is needed on the 'stream/message/body' element, so that the client knows not to emoticonise text, if this whole IMML thing doesn't pan out. E.g.
<message [...]>
<body preserve="true">
(SomeClassInAStrangeProgrammingLanguage:
{SomeMethod:
Console:P("The console print method.");
:}
:)
</body>
</message>
That would have more than 1 emoticon. I can't think of any programming
languages it would affect, but in the world of the internet, I could bet
you that one exists that would mess up in an IM client.
Can we reach consensus on this? I agree with psa, +1, even as it stands. Regards, Jonathan Dickinson -- jonathan chayce dickinson ruby/c# developer email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <some profound piece of wisdom>
<<inline: Flowers.png>>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
