Subject: Re: Question wrt escape/control characters

From: [email-masked] (A VAX's nightmare)
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 18:53:14 -0800

>  I'm not sure how well Emacs clients do.  I'd be worried that simply

Well, emacs, by default, reads in control characters and displays them in the
format: ^L ^G etc... In other words, sending something like an underlined
sentence to emacs would make it virtualy unreadable.

-Wayne/Sadric@LambdaMOO

---

From: An Inquiring Mind Who Wants to Know <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 18:58:04 -0800

But there are a fair number of situations where the person in the
charge can say what a person needs to have in order to use that MOO. LambdaMOO
is much too open for that policy obviously, but I'm working on a small MOO for
Group Decision Support where I can tell the end-user exactly what they need to
do to interface with the program. I would _love_ to be able to send escape
codes, but have nowhere near the technical knowledge to hack the server. I vot
for Pavel's change. :)

Brett Bendickson / Rohan @ everywhere

---

From: [email-masked] (Jeff Prothero)
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:45:22 -0800

[email-masked]:

| Also, Just being able to
| send bitmaps or vt100 escape codes isn't strong enough as a good quality,
| general, output mechanism for MUDs.  What I "really want" is a very high
| level, low bandwidth display protocol with a good client package that
| implements it.  

I personally think it's a little close to midnight to start with
2-D stuff, and that it would be better to look at, say Michael
Snoswell's ([email-masked]) CT, Rend386, and suchlike
3D-VR-for-the-masses stuff... but if one really wants highlevel
low-bandwidth 2-D graphics, the North American Presentation Level
Protocol might be something to look at, clearly a decent amount of
work went into designing it to more or less those specs.  I don't
know if it died for political or technical reasons, but the former
seems just as likely in my ignorance...

CrT