-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Aug 15, 2012, at 08:54, Kurt Zeilenga wrote: > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 7:28 AM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> In fact, I'd argue that this spec is a technical solution to a social >>> problem >> >> I note, after drafting many more acerbic replies, that this is >> consistent with all specs. >> >> Messaging is a social problem. > > Yes. > > My concern is how effective our solution is in solving the social problem, > messaging between humans. > > XMPP IM (without 308) has demonstrated itself to be an effective solution. > XMPP IM with 308 implemented universally would also likely an effective > solution. > > It seems to me that XMPP IM, with some clients supporting 308 and some not, > will be less effective than either of the above solutions, simply because key > information (this message is a correction) is lost on fallback in clients not > supporting 308. > I do not completely agree that key information will (always) be lost. It does indeed matter significantly how a client renders corrected text: 1) delete of old, overwrite with new (lost information) 2) strikethrough of old, place new immediately next to it (no lost information) And there's a couple of other ways I can see this going... - - m&m Matthew A. Miller <http://goo.gl/LK55L> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQK7meAAoJEJq6Ou0cgrSPlGgH/idyONFgZueMp0vHgieGX2jx uaQ6JwlBrJ/QCSgf7IjOWDBSENxJhg2Th72TI9RjmBCJv9842qXHmaKu2cf5nCNb cle6rThuvqCeI0BTgsg8d9hgj2jdA65Tn4ljnyrL05JQlPMeg8wSaHIK+kmh7Z+2 DViszYVZXvJPLgNC98ZpttvJZsL9GXYS+zc5UO1JC0Ehgdr3/WdPMai8J8KVpnGl pqWHHVTUieZc+jv25WgnIa89V+6YlCQlAj8bl4/5Cs6r/Dzx3uB19T+twFW2b/oh gDnj1xlk0coQ6FUxeTSruPaCDxC90vdxH1Te2cCyktdEU9KhXnR2/Pu0aLeyfTA= =5hoj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
