On 18.10.2017 19:58, Jonas Wielicki wrote: > On Mittwoch, 18. Oktober 2017 18:12:54 CEST Florian Schmaus wrote: >> The situation BMH tries to improve is the following: I do have a bunch >> of data formatted using a markup language, say CommonMark, that I want >> to send over XMPP to an XMPP client. Because there is no converter from >> CommonMark to XHTML-IM(-NEXT) and since I don't want to write one (for >> various reasons), I'm just going to stuff CommonMark into <body/>. > > I think if you’re doing that, you’re already doing it wrong. Really. There > should be a separate non-body element for markup, and body should only > contain > simple, unformatted plain text
How would you image a plain text version of CommonMark to look like? And even if there are some sensible CommonMark to plain text conversation rules, then you still need such a converter. You have your data in CommonMark, and to send it into the XMPP network you suggest that we use and create two converters if we don't want to loose some layout/stylistic information. I don't think such an approach would be sensible. And I also believe that people will just do what I'm going to do: Stuff CommonMark into <body/>. Under this assumption BMHs do not make the situation worse. If a client makes use of them, it will only be beneficial. There will be no interoperability nightmare > because you’d have to make sure > that the markup flavour you announce is actually the flavour the user typed > into the box). No, "we" don't have to make sure. That is something the sources of the markup take care of. - Florian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
