[96] in Coldmud discussion meeting

Re: ASCII Codes etc

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sat Dec 4 16:26:09 1993 )

From: David Engberg <snarflrd@leland.Stanford.EDU>
To: BRANDON@cc.usu.edu (Lynx)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1993 13:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Cc: coldstuff@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <01H62X8D1S7MANXSH4@cc.usu.edu> from "Lynx" at Dec 4, 93 12:01:56 pm


> The only pro for using vt codes is that it is a KNOWN standard. Far as I know
> there really is not a very wide spread standard for anything else...

not all ASCII unprintable bit sequences are vt codes.  moving beyond raw
text&telnet to smart client/server interaction makes efficient protocols
desirable.  (where you don't have to ignore >25% of potential data received
just because of archaic security holes in ancient terminal protocols.)
for my graphical client, any line beginning with a non-printable character
is assumed to be something more interesting and is parsed as such.
hardcoding servers to limit me from using this seems short-sighted, especially
considering the goal of the project is to increase the potential power of
designers.