I don't know what others think but maybe we should just pause and evaluate before jumping. <br><br>This is a good suggestion but we currently have no Internet support for any protocols besides HTTP on our server. In other words, we run with a pretty well locked-down firewall. <br>
<br>When we recently opened up a tiny hole to allow people to send feedback messages, we were immediately beset with spam. Supporting a new protocol like IRC would have to be a decision we'd make as a group and not on the spur of the moment. <br>
<br>Our current chat is javascript and browser-based; it really consumes a lot of resources. I agree that moving away from it is a good idea. But I think we need to assess our needs a little more completely than this to make a pretty major decision. <br>
<br>I'm also personally reluctant to embrace IRC when so many people seem to be moving to more sophisticated chat servers and services. As a matter of fact, I'd suspect that most of our users, not generally being of the computer science variety, would favor something like Jabber, something that's compatible with Google Talk, Apple iChat, and IBM's SameTime. It's also supported by many other chat clients. <br>
<br>The Jabber and XMPP specs are the only real "standards" out there. I know that IRC is pretty open but there's no major network that directly supports it. XMPP and Jabber are pretty much the same protocol at this point and therefore the most likely to be with us in the future. There's good deal of work going on to merge voice, text, and video chat via XMPP. I'd love to be convinced otherwise. Show us the data and the context of the data and we can evaluate it. <br>
<br>I really like what Austin has done: he made the current chat service simpler. I've also brought up the first real-time user list we've had. You can see the first cut here:<br><br><a href="http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1">http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1</a><br>
<br>More will follow.<br><br>I think it's great to get a fresh look at the system. As you can see, we want to accommodate as many user styles as we can. But without data to support our hunches, I recommend we take this step by step. <br>
<br>Since, as a rule, we try to set development tasks as a function of our monthly Steering Committee (SC) meetings, you may want to join us for the next meeting and discuss it with all of us at that time. <br><br>Thanks.<br>
<br>Bill Flanagan<br><br> <br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 8, 2008 11:35 PM, Bryan Bishop <<a href="mailto:kanzure@gmail.com">kanzure@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Friday 08 February 2008, Jason Kelly wrote:<br>> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat<br>> rooms disappeared?<br><br></div>Let's just go with IRC?<br><div class="Ih2E3d">
<br>- Bryan<br>________________________________________<br>Bryan Bishop<br><a href="http://heybryan.org/" target="_blank">http://heybryan.org/</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br></div><div><div>
</div><div class="Wj3C7c">OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List<br><a href="mailto:discuss@openwetware.org">discuss@openwetware.org</a><br><a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>