Oh, if you take it out of context like that, then yes... I was talking about my suggestion of a removable prefix. On Sep 6, 2012 3:37 AM, "Mark Rejhon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > > Although this needs some thought to handle XHTML-IM, and it may prove > > impossible - though we've done worse things with FLOTs before. > > Been away, so replying late, too. > > From first glance, XEP-0308 doesn't seem incompatible with XHTML-IM. > It seems to be "naturally" usable with stanzas containing XHTML-IM -- > just send a standard XHTML-IM message (with both <body/> and <html/>) > but also include a <replace/> in stanza. Problem solved. The exact > same reasonable UI suggestion can be followed as well. > > Can you explain the situation of impossibility? I am interested in your > POV. > > Thanks, > Mark Rejhon >
