On Donnerstag, 15. März 2018 11:31:37 CET W. Martin Borgert wrote: > On 2018-03-15 10:22, Kozlov Konstantin wrote: > > I don't want to discuss XEP-0393, 'cause the whole idea of using LML in IM > > sounds bad. Flaws if it is obvious, so it's needless to mention them > > again. > > I disagree. Yes it is ugly, but having a widely used LML, such > as Markdown (in contrast to some strange homebrew) in XMPP would > be a pragmatic approach, IMVHO. > > Many people know Markdown syntax nowadays, there are parsers for > it in many different programming languages, and we already know > how ugly and illogical it is. Just needs a new XEP :~)
The rationale against Markdown or RST was that people would do virtually the same they did for XHTML-IM which lead to funny security issues (which lead to XHTML-IM being deprecated): use arbitrary markdown parser, put result in HTML DOM. Now many markdown parsers allow pass-through of HTML by default. reStructuredText allows .. raw:: html. Both is not desirable, which is why the author of '393 (with support from the community, afaict) decided to *not* do that. kind regards, Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
