On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Nicolas Vérité <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 16:30, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Nicolas Vérité >> For only one edit, I'm not sure this is necessary for interop (and >> therefore to include in the spec) - but clients are free to not render >> an edit as an edit if they feel they don't want to for some reason. > > Drrring. Wrong. This is a strong user demand, maybe the strongest. It > is mandatory to clearly state an edit as an edit. Or show the original > along with the corrected (strike formatting, or whatever, if you > want).
Right, clients are free to render this however they want to. Perhaps I should add an "I wasn't willing to render this as an edit" error? That way if a client wanted to reject edits after the first one, it could, and if it wanted to allow them, it could. Does that work for your user requirements (your users would never send a subsequent message, of course, so would never encounter the error - but would send it if a more liberal client were try and edit something)? /K
