nu.kanga.list.mud-dev

8415: [MUD-Dev] Re: Bruce Sterling on Virtual Community goals

 >The RFC allows a compliant implementation to respond "No, I don't do that."
 >to options it doesn't feel like supporting.  I used this freedom a lot.

Nod. An important one for me was NAWS (Negotiate About Window Size), which
lets the server know how big the window of the client is. I also did
BINARY, SUPGA and ENDOFRECORD because they are pretty trivial. Also the
IAC stuff for escaped things.

 >I don't think a single monolithic server would be flexible enough for
 >what most of us are interested in.   I'd build a mix and match collection
 >of components for things like internal language.  Some successful MUDs
 >don't have internal languages at all, and that's a model we should support
 >too.

So, you're thinking it could have either some hard-coded scenario
stuff, or could have it soft-coded in an internal MUD language? I guess
that's do-able. Haven't most systems that started out without an
in-MUD language eventually added one, just to gain the flexibility?

--
Chris Gray     cg@ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA