Den 2009-08-12 13:42 skrev Peter Åstrand: > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Peter Rosin wrote: > >>>> If we say MUST or even SHOULD, anyone encountering something >>>> else will get the feeling that fingerpointing is prefectly >>>> valid. It is not, and we can't change that fact since we do not >>>> own the spec. >>> >>> Yes, we own our spec. >> >> I was referring to /the/ spec from RealVNC, not our spec. I should >> probably have said that we don't own the protocol instead. > > I would say that the RealVNC PDF spec is becoming increasingly less > important. I haven't seen any updates except for the number allocations, > which they "have" to do, as long as they claim being the VNC protocol > registrar. Since they are using the PDF format, it's practically > impossible to see which changes they are making. I can see that some > kind of update was done today, but without doing a full manual > comparision, I don't know what has been changed.
That's your take on the situation. If that assumption holds we are ok to do whatever we want with the 3.xxx series of the protocol. But what if the assumption doesn't hold? Tread with care. > The free RealVNC version is basically not developed any further. As far > as I understand, the other versions are based on another, newer VNC > specification (version 4), and this protocol is not public. I'd be very surprised if the closed source options from RealVNC do not support the 3.xxx series of the protocol. >> If we truly owned our spec, it would be so easy to bump the protocol >> version and be done with it. > > I think this is an academic discussion. Even if we "owned" the protocol, > we wouldn't want to raise the major protocol number just for this > encoding issue. That would (also) involve some major work. > > What we are trying to do here is to clean up the situation for current > implementations and the current protocol; not starting to work on a Next > Generation VNC. Introducing RFB 003.009 and saying that it is exactly as RFB 003.009 except all strings are UTF-8 is not exactly rocket science. And implementing it would be easy. At least if you have implemented 3.8 with UTF-8 (except CutText), but if you haven't done that you really should start with that anyway. But I agree it is academic... >>> Perhaps it's time to vote? >> >> Vote? > > Do you have a better suggestion? I decide? :-) > [...] every vote is treated equal. And why do *you* get to decide that this project is governed by democracy? (because I assume you meant that one person gets one vote, which isn't at all self-evident) Cheers, Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ tigervnc-rfbproto mailing list tigervnc-rfbproto@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-rfbproto
