Notice: Any messages purporting to come from this site telling you that your password has expired, or that you need to verify your details, confirm your email, resolve issues, making threats, or asking for money, are
spam. We do not email users with any such messages. If you have lost your password you can obtain a new one by using the
password reset link.
Due to spam on this forum, all posts now need moderator approval.
Entire forum
➜ MUSHclient
➜ Suggestions
➜ MXP <supports> optionally include <image>?
|
MXP <supports> optionally include <image>?
|
It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.
Refresh page
| Posted by
| Ixokai
USA (24 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Mon 28 Jun 2004 03:50 AM (UTC) |
| Message
| Title says most of it :)
I followed the thread that talked about MushClient claiming support of <image> and all, but I was wondering: instead of now denying support, can it be an option (possibly default off) to have it claim support even though its only partial?
Personally, I like the 'parital support'. :) | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Nick Gammon
Australia (23,165 posts) Bio
Forum Administrator |
| Date
| Reply #1 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 04:57 AM (UTC) |
| Message
| | Can't you just test the client name, and assume the partial support? |
- Nick Gammon
www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Flannel
USA (1,230 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Reply #2 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 05:01 AM (UTC) Amended on Mon 28 Jun 2004 05:02 AM (UTC) by Flannel
|
| Message
| I think hes coming from a users perspective. I think he means he wants to be able to have links pop up rather than whatever the server does when it says no.
MC says it doesnt support images, or at least, the recent thread said it would stop.
Or at least, thats what I get from it. Ive no way to check either way, dont use MXP. But I think he wants to be able to have his client claim support, like it used to. |
~Flannel
Messiah of Rose
Eternity's Trials.
Clones are people two. | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Shadowfyr
USA (1,791 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Reply #3 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 05:35 AM (UTC) Amended on Mon 28 Jun 2004 05:36 AM (UTC) by Shadowfyr
|
| Message
| | Yeah. I thought about that, but forgot to suggest it. It is a lot easier for the user to make the client say yes, when it doesn't matter if the support is limited, than to convince the staff of a mud to test for a specific client. Being able to adjust this behaviour in the client when it is useful would be a lot nicer than having it never say it can support them. | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Ixokai
USA (24 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Reply #4 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 09:21 AM (UTC) |
| Message
| Exactly. I'm coming from a user's perspective. I wouldn't play at a game that had the hyper-graphial map like that one guy had, nor would I ever use a client that embedded graphics in my client... but I want it MushClient to provide me a link, no matter what the server thinks :)
--Ixokai | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Ixokai
USA (24 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Reply #5 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 09:28 AM (UTC) |
| Message
| See. As a user, I want a text client, period. I have no desire for anything else. Moderate/limited MXP support can enhance the text experience, but I want to keep that limited.
If you ever started supporting images embedded in your text windows, and it wasn't an option to use MXP /without/ those images, i'd have to stop using the client... its just distracting. :) | | Top |
|
| Posted by
| Shadowfyr
USA (1,791 posts) Bio
|
| Date
| Reply #6 on Mon 28 Jun 2004 05:59 PM (UTC) |
| Message
| Ah.. But then you could in such a client always have a 'show links only for images' option Ixokai. At least if it was some version of Mushclient anyway. Other developers would probably be far less responsive and babble something about finding some other client if you didn't like it. ;)
Personally.. I am used to text only, in news servers and it pisses me off every time someone says, "heh, look at this... Do you see the problems in ..." and there is an imbedded image, but the news reader doesn't show it. Worse, the decoder option will show them, but not in context, so it is hard to tell which image, which part of the posting refers to. I can easilly imagine something similar happening in a pure text mud client when the images are intended to be seen in the context of the text. If you can live with that, then a client with full support that lets you show only links as an option would be a good compromise, just as letting us force the client to respond with "yes I can do that" as a user option is a decent compromise over it insisting that it has 0 support. | | Top |
|
The dates and times for posts above are shown in Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC).
To show them in your local time you can join the forum, and then set the 'time correction' field in your profile to the number of hours difference between your location and UTC time.
20,538 views.
It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.
Refresh page
![[Go to top]](/images/gototop.gif)
top