[MUD-Dev] Re: Output Classification Notes, version 061098

[Vadim Tkachenko <vt#freehold,crocodile.org>]

Mike L Kesl wrote:
> 
> . o O ( Output Classification ) O o .
> (mlkesl 061098)
> 
> Problem: The server needs to send different types of output in different ways
> Goals: Provide client support beyond the standard 'dumb' telnet client.
> 
> In order to be able to provide multiple clients in the most efficient way
> I suggest we classify the server's output. In other words different types
> of output will be sent in different ways, using the same method names of
> course, but that is irrelevant for the non coders.

My solution was to implement a sort of meta-messages which can be
interpreted by the protocol adaptor and visualized in a right way by the
client

> I can think of the following, each line representing a separate type:
> 
> Aural   (messages from sentients mostly)        "Johan says 'Greetings'"
> 
> Visual  (stuff you see, room desc, items, etc)  "The sun goes down."
> 
> Action  (Action you experience in some way)     "You slice the blob."
> 
> Server  (out of character info from server)     "SHUTDOWN IN 5 MINUTES"
> 
> Prompt  (the player defined prompt)             "32/45hp 20/20ma opp:blob"
> 
> Map     (the overhead map, ascii or tilemap)    tile images or ascii block
> 
> Format  (color, text formatting)                ansi color / html stuff
> Image   (pictures of course, with text equiv.)  tilemaps / items / people

Why don't you just say "OK, there's a message formed like
<tag><message-body> and define <tag> somewhere else - it doesn't have to
be something predefined.

By the way, reminds me of RFC-822 - did anybody here use anything like
that to deliver the messages to the smart clients? :-)

> One system I have been considering is to just use special prefixes before
> output to distinguish it and all the client to do the work, parsing the
> output's prefix and deciding where it goes from there. This option still
> requires a list of the output types however, and that is the main function
> of this document. Using this system the dumb telnet connection would
> simply have the prefixes stripped. Not sure about this implementation.

This, in turn, reminds me of MIME multipart/mixed between the
meta-message producer and the protocol adaptor.

Maybe it's absurd, but come on, MIME content handler would be pretty
reusable, I guess?

> Mike Kesl :)

-- 
Still alive and smile stays on,
Vadim Tkachenko <vt#freehold,crocodile.org>
--
UNIX _is_ user friendly, he's just very picky about who his friends are