On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been convinced that this feature is of sufficient benefit to a
> group of the users that it's worth including (And I think this also
> implies sending over the transform methods, either as-specced or some
> other thing more advanced than <fragment>s). Referring to my other
> mail, I'd suggest that tier one of mandatory implementation is
> <fragment>-equivalent (i.e. always sending the complete text so far)
> and that tier 2 is everything else, including the delay codes (where
> tier 2 is OPTIONAL, but if you implement it you MUST implement all of
> it)).

Excellent idea.  In fact, I used a tier-based system with 4 tiers.
But I decided not to include the tiers in the specification because I
felt it complicated things.
Perhaps if we simplify it down to 2 tiers, it would be more
acceptable.  How does this compromise sound:

TIER 1: Standard
Insert/Delete/Backspace/Reset

TIER 2: High-def
Delay Codes/Cursor Codes

Clients that support only TIER 1 can safely ignore TIER 2 codes, and
still show the real time text properly.  However, TIER 2 only provides
the high-def experience.   As my earlier source-code snippet shows,
using a serial edit code technique isn't THAT complex to program.

Reply via email to