ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org>]

I'm looking at ESME-88 and having second thoughts on whether it's wise
to have this "feature". This would mean that anyone could post images
in the timeline. Apart from being able to post images with
questionable value or even offensive, huge images might screw the
layout, not to mention that they could be used as a beacon
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_bug).

Of course, this is valid for avatars, but they're more restricted. All
in all, I'm wondering whether we are turning ESME into a myspace
look-alike by resolving this issue.

What do you think, should we close the issue with wontfix or resolve it?

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org>]

> What about having some kind of thumbnail that is small and when
> clicked expands to a larger size in another browser window. Maybe with
> jQuery? I think it is important that the user doesn't have to upload
> images to add them but can use a URL to point to the image.

I'm not against having images, but we should think it through and do
it right. Fixing the upper size limit is one think which could help
with controlling the design.

> However, I don't view this functionality as critical for our first
> release. If it is broken with the current release of textile, then I
> don't have a problem with that.

Not broken, it's a feature :) and not in textile parser itself, but
the way we're using it.

> Maybe someone can add a CR to the textile team that adds the
> possibility to turn off embedded image tags if desired.

David seems to be the textile team or at least responsible for the
module. He mentioned in a previous mail that it could be disabled.

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[Markus Kohler <ma...@gmail.com>]

Hi all,
Brizzly (http://brizzly.com/) solved this problem very nicely IMHO.
It automatically detects whether a link points to an image or video and
shows the content inline.
It seems to scale down the media to avoid layout problems.

It does load the media asynchronously in the background, so the perceived
performance is great, because the user can already read the text.

So I think supporting image links might not really be necessary. In general
I would avoid loading images or anything else from an external server,
without the user interacting. e.g. the ESME server could act as a kind of
proxy HTTP server for images coming from external sources.


If someone wants an invite to Brizzly, just let me know.


Regards,
Markus

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Richard Hirsch <hi...@gmail.com>wrote:

> What about having some kind of thumbnail that is small and when
> clicked expands to a larger size in another browser window. Maybe with
> jQuery? I think it is important that the user doesn't have to upload
> images to add them but can use a URL to point to the image.
>
> However, I don't view this functionality as critical for our first
> release. If it is broken with the current release of textile, then I
> don't have a problem with that.
>
> Maybe someone can add a CR to the textile team that adds the
> possibility to turn off embedded image tags if desired.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:47 AM, David Pollak
> <fe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> > It's simple to resolve.  images can be excluded from the Textile
> markup
> >> (I
> >> > can't remember how off hand, but there's a flag to pass to the textile
> >> > processor).
> >>
> >> Oh, it is already "resolved", meaning that image urls cannot be
> >> parsed. It's "broken" like that because ESME's MsgParser sees the url
> >> first and transforms it to <a href=...>, which the TextileParser
> >> (which is invoked afterwards) cannot parse as an image anymore. The
> >> issue is that someone wanted this feature and filed a report to "fix"
> >> it. And I think I'm happy with the current situation where images
> >> don't work.
> >>
> >> So does that mean that you're also against free embedding of images in
> >> messages?
> >>
> >
> > I'm neutral on the issue.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> > Surf the harmonics
> >
>

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[Richard Hirsch <hi...@gmail.com>]

What about having some kind of thumbnail that is small and when
clicked expands to a larger size in another browser window. Maybe with
jQuery? I think it is important that the user doesn't have to upload
images to add them but can use a URL to point to the image.

However, I don't view this functionality as critical for our first
release. If it is broken with the current release of textile, then I
don't have a problem with that.

Maybe someone can add a CR to the textile team that adds the
possibility to turn off embedded image tags if desired.

D.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:47 AM, David Pollak
<fe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> > It's simple to resolve.  images can be excluded from the Textile markup
>> (I
>> > can't remember how off hand, but there's a flag to pass to the textile
>> > processor).
>>
>> Oh, it is already "resolved", meaning that image urls cannot be
>> parsed. It's "broken" like that because ESME's MsgParser sees the url
>> first and transforms it to <a href=...>, which the TextileParser
>> (which is invoked afterwards) cannot parse as an image anymore. The
>> issue is that someone wanted this feature and filed a report to "fix"
>> it. And I think I'm happy with the current situation where images
>> don't work.
>>
>> So does that mean that you're also against free embedding of images in
>> messages?
>>
>
> I'm neutral on the issue.
>
>
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> Surf the harmonics
>

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[David Pollak <fe...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org> wrote:

> > It's simple to resolve.  images can be excluded from the Textile markup
> (I
> > can't remember how off hand, but there's a flag to pass to the textile
> > processor).
>
> Oh, it is already "resolved", meaning that image urls cannot be
> parsed. It's "broken" like that because ESME's MsgParser sees the url
> first and transforms it to <a href=...>, which the TextileParser
> (which is invoked afterwards) cannot parse as an image anymore. The
> issue is that someone wanted this feature and filed a report to "fix"
> it. And I think I'm happy with the current situation where images
> don't work.
>
> So does that mean that you're also against free embedding of images in
> messages?
>

I'm neutral on the issue.



-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org>]

> It's simple to resolve.  images can be excluded from the Textile markup (I
> can't remember how off hand, but there's a flag to pass to the textile
> processor).

Oh, it is already "resolved", meaning that image urls cannot be
parsed. It's "broken" like that because ESME's MsgParser sees the url
first and transforms it to <a href=...>, which the TextileParser
(which is invoked afterwards) cannot parse as an image anymore. The
issue is that someone wanted this feature and filed a report to "fix"
it. And I think I'm happy with the current situation where images
don't work.

So does that mean that you're also against free embedding of images in messages?

Re: ESME-88 Images (urls) in messages don't work with Textile

[David Pollak <fe...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Vassil Dichev <vd...@apache.org> wrote:

> I'm looking at ESME-88 and having second thoughts on whether it's wise
> to have this "feature". This would mean that anyone could post images
> in the timeline. Apart from being able to post images with
> questionable value or even offensive, huge images might screw the
> layout, not to mention that they could be used as a beacon
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_bug).
>
> Of course, this is valid for avatars, but they're more restricted. All
> in all, I'm wondering whether we are turning ESME into a myspace
> look-alike by resolving this issue.
>
> What do you think, should we close the issue with wontfix or resolve it?
>

It's simple to resolve.  images can be excluded from the Textile markup (I
can't remember how off hand, but there's a flag to pass to the textile
processor).



-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics