Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
  Top Mud Sites Forum > Mud Development and Administration > MUD Builders and Areas
Read-only archive
The Top Mud Sites forum is closed.
Posting, registration and logins are disabled.

 
Old 08-22-2011, 10:58 AM   #21
Ide
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 361
Ide will become famous soon enoughIde will become famous soon enough
Re: Need for a new MUD engine?

I can think of at least two websocket clients (Decaf and phud) not to mention other text game 'clients' such as interpreters. All have issues with screen readers. It may look easy because it's 'just' a web page, but in my experience it's not that simple.

All of this talk about websockets is besides the point though. You already can use websocket clients to connect to muds that don't support websockets.

Creating a mud that takes connections (websockets, telnet, custom protocol, etcetera) is a relatively simple task. Creating a mud that other people want to play and/or use as a base for their own creation is another task entirely.
 
Old 08-26-2011, 04:10 PM   #22
Manitas
New Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
Manitas is on a distinguished road
Re: Need for a new MUD engine?

Sure, attempts are made even though the standard is not yet established. Both are work in progress with some basic features.
It's quite normal for WIP to have issues, but there are no fundamental differences between normal websites and normal websites using websockets, so they can be made accessible if accessibility is one of design goals.

They are quite out of scope of this discussion, Decaf is client only, both rely on telnet and mud protocols and both clients are terminal emulators. Phud is an example of what i'm proposing not to do (in addition, it's written in PHP which is a bad choice imo).
 




All times are GMT -4.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2022