On 7 November 2017 at 18:15, Goffi <go...@goffi.org> wrote: > Le mardi 7 novembre 2017, 13:02:40 CET Dave Cridland a écrit : >> On 6 November 2017 at 22:58, Goffi <go...@goffi.org> wrote: >> > As an exemple which could lead to big trouble, imagine a shell@ MUC room >> > with> >> > somebody pasting this code to explain something: >> > ls `date +%Y-%m-%d`-*.xml >> >> We could include an indicator of how to interpret text - basically, >> Florian Schmaus's recent suggestion tailored to this. >> >> Then you end up with: >> >> 1) Sender is plaintext -> Receiver does not style. >> 2) Sender is styled, Receiver cannot style -> Receiver does not style. >> 3) Sender is styled, Receiver can style -> Receiver styles. >> >> (Note in case (1), whether the Receiver can style or not is irrelevant). > > Note that an indicator is exactly what is done with XHTML-IM. >
Well, no. XHTML-IM sends two message texts in the same message. Hopefully they might even have the same content. In email, there's a method for sending "multipart/alternative" which is used for this, and both spammers and marketeers alike insert *different* content into each fork, to bypass or confuse content-checking or to take advantage of rendering quirks of clients. We've yet to deal with the security implications of that. I'm thinking more like BMH (but probably constrained to a single format). Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: standards-unsubscr...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________
