4 ms·

When I need to do something realtime, I connect users to my IRC server. Writing a client for IRC in Flash is very easy, I haven't tried with Javascript, I imagi

by bemmu 18y ago

When I need to do something realtime, I connect users to my IRC server. Writing a client for IRC in Flash is very easy, I haven't tried with Javascript, I imagine you would use a keepalive connection somehow. Am I missing something by not using XMPP?

axod 18y ago
>> "Am I missing something by not using XMPP?" You're missing hours of headaches working through over-engineered ridiculously overly complicated horrible XML protocol. Stick with IRC ;)
- cubedice 18y ago
  I just coded a level file in XML for a game being developed in one of my classes. The same group member who was so adamant about coding the levels in XML had neglected to build an XML creation program. So there we were, trying to wade through > 10,000 lines of XML. I wanted to cry
- clemesha 18y ago
  FWIW, I've had a different experience with XMPP. Take for example XMPP Multi-User Chat (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html) - which outlines a rich set of interactions between occupants of a room - something I'm really glad someone else engineered for me. Plus, take a look at the XML stanzas (in the examples here: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html) you are sending to the server, they're really not that big or complicated. Lastly, with BOSH (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html) and incredible XMPP Javascript client libs like Strophe (http://code.stanziq.com/strophe/ http://code.stanziq.com/strophe/), the possibilities are pretty exciting for web apps.
  - axod 18y ago
    A quick skim of the Multi-User Chat though... Firstly, it's 9 years old :/ why is everyone still not using it? Secondly, you can immediately tell it's ridiculously over-engineered. <field var='muc#roominfo_occupants' label='Number of occupants'> <value>3</value> </field> Sorry, but you can't really look at that protocol and say it's not ugly and verbose beyond reason. The number of occupants in a room is surely used enough to deserve an encoding of less than 75 characters to specify a number.
    - jay_kyburz 18y ago
      Isn't that the whole problem with XML
wmf 18y ago
Am I missing something by not using XMPP? Identity and S2S federation. IRC is fine for a closed system, but XMPP's global namespace has a lot of potential for integration between different real-time systems.
- davidw 18y ago
  Ok... now what feature that people need does that translate into? Honest question - I don't know much about the space.
  - l_frequency 18y ago
    Imagine a world where IM was more like Email... every company/org has their own server and everything else is just piping.
  - wmf 18y ago
    I'm not quite sure, but imagine something like webhooks but real-time. You could tell service A to ping service B over XMPP whenever something interesting happens; I think this would be harder with IRC.
  - axod 18y ago
    Think IPv6, or openID and you'll see what the feature is ;)
  - jerf 18y ago
    Server-to-server means you set up your IM server, and I set up my IM server, and... drumroll please... they can actually talk to each other. Remember when Prodigy users couldn't mail Compuserve users, or AOL users couldn't mail Usenet users? That's where IM is right now, held back by the fact that it consists of nothing but a series of closed gardens. XMPP makes it work like email. Your JID looks like an email (and can also end up being an email identifier), and the servers know how to route amongst one another. If you can't see how this might be a nice feature, it is only because you've become too used to the status quo to see. Identity comes from the fact that your JID is now generally accessible from anywhere in the world, and thus your JID can be used as your identity, just as your email address can, and, like I said, they can even be exactly the same. Further, since XMPP was designed to work this way from day one, it means that all other XMPP services work across servers this way. Presence subscriptions are correctly handled, one server can host conferences and people from other servers can participate, etc.

by bemmu 18y ago

axod 18y ago

>> "Am I missing something by not using XMPP?" You're missing hours of headaches working through over-engineered ridiculously overly complicated horrible XML protocol. Stick with IRC ;)

cubedice 18y ago
I just coded a level file in XML for a game being developed in one of my classes. The same group member who was so adamant about coding the levels in XML had neglected to build an XML creation program. So there we were, trying to wade through > 10,000 lines of XML. I wanted to cry
clemesha 18y ago
FWIW, I've had a different experience with XMPP. Take for example XMPP Multi-User Chat (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html) - which outlines a rich set of interactions between occupants of a room - something I'm really glad someone else engineered for me. Plus, take a look at the XML stanzas (in the examples here: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html) you are sending to the server, they're really not that big or complicated. Lastly, with BOSH (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html) and incredible XMPP Javascript client libs like Strophe (http://code.stanziq.com/strophe/ http://code.stanziq.com/strophe/), the possibilities are pretty exciting for web apps.
- axod 18y ago
  A quick skim of the Multi-User Chat though... Firstly, it's 9 years old :/ why is everyone still not using it? Secondly, you can immediately tell it's ridiculously over-engineered. <field var='muc#roominfo_occupants' label='Number of occupants'> <value>3</value> </field> Sorry, but you can't really look at that protocol and say it's not ugly and verbose beyond reason. The number of occupants in a room is surely used enough to deserve an encoding of less than 75 characters to specify a number.
  - jay_kyburz 18y ago
    Isn't that the whole problem with XML

wmf 18y ago

Am I missing something by not using XMPP? Identity and S2S federation. IRC is fine for a closed system, but XMPP's global namespace has a lot of potential for integration between different real-time systems.

davidw 18y ago
Ok... now what feature that people need does that translate into? Honest question - I don't know much about the space.
- l_frequency 18y ago
  Imagine a world where IM was more like Email... every company/org has their own server and everything else is just piping.
- wmf 18y ago
  I'm not quite sure, but imagine something like webhooks but real-time. You could tell service A to ping service B over XMPP whenever something interesting happens; I think this would be harder with IRC.
- axod 18y ago
  Think IPv6, or openID and you'll see what the feature is ;)
- jerf 18y ago
  Server-to-server means you set up your IM server, and I set up my IM server, and... drumroll please... they can actually talk to each other. Remember when Prodigy users couldn't mail Compuserve users, or AOL users couldn't mail Usenet users? That's where IM is right now, held back by the fact that it consists of nothing but a series of closed gardens. XMPP makes it work like email. Your JID looks like an email (and can also end up being an email identifier), and the servers know how to route amongst one another. If you can't see how this might be a nice feature, it is only because you've become too used to the status quo to see. Identity comes from the fact that your JID is now generally accessible from anywhere in the world, and thus your JID can be used as your identity, just as your email address can, and, like I said, they can even be exactly the same. Further, since XMPP was designed to work this way from day one, it means that all other XMPP services work across servers this way. Presence subscriptions are correctly handled, one server can host conferences and people from other servers can participate, etc.