Le samedi 4 novembre 2006 03:01, Martijn Klingens a écrit : > On Saturday 04 November 2006 00:31, Matt Rogers wrote: > > Personally, I think we should abandon the use of the XEP as the basis for > > our common format. I see no reason to discontinue support for the XEP, > > but as pointed out, there are other people using the current Kopete > > emoticon specification, at least in KDE, so something that is geared > > towards a specific protocol or use case (in this case, IM) is something > > I'd like to avoid if we can.
Well, this is not really an argument, because there is also many other client using the XEP. And AFAIK, only konversation is using our emoticon format. KMail just use the icon without using our xml file. > I tend to agree here. On the one hand using the XEP would seem the > 'natural' choice for it embraces open standards. > > However, the XEP has severe limitations as Olivier points out. Since some > of them are quite fundamental it's questionable whether it can be adjusted > enough to fit all our use cases. > > Also, since the XEP seems to be a subset of what we need it should be > fairly easy to write an importer and effectively still support it. the XEP is not a subset, but a superset. In Kopete, we don't implement everything that's in the XEP (protocol emoticons, language, sound, ...) Also, having to be able to parse two different xml format is not so much code. Kopete support both the XEP and the kopete emoticon format without problem. > Added bonus is that existing emoticon themes can still be used, and > existing apps like kmail don't need many changes. So if we want to standardize the Kopete format, we need to add many addition to it, which is not required if we just use the XEP one. I have not seen real technical issue with this format.
pgpBBn5XXRn5t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ kopete-devel mailing list kopete-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
