> <bikeshed> > We already see, the emojis get less important here and there and are > replaced by "stickers". > Which is already supported in XMPP by XEP-0231 (bits of binary, BoB). > This allows even more childish and silly reactions! > XMPP reactions should support that. > </bikeshed>
Facetiousness aside, I agree with Martin's underlying point (to an extent.) The common implementation of Reactions sees emjois aggregated and visually attached to the message itself in a compact way; this is slightly different to the use of Responses® where a message is in direct reply to another (a reaction/response of sorts), but stands in its own right. While responses could be displayed in some way that connects them to the original message, this can be difficult to achieve in a similarly compact way and tends to lead to design and usability complexities. That said, it's not for protocol to mandate visual design, and there is no reason to limit protocol because UI can't keep up. However, I still feel there is a semantic difference between Reactions and Responses. Reactions should be kept simple and to the point (overachieving XEPs rarely get implemented), and if there is an underlying mechanism, that can be abstracted out and used. We already have XEP-0372 (References) and XEP-0367 (Message Attaching), which should be adequate for covering the various types of Reponses people might want to use (stickers, reaction gifs, etc.)
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
