> 'In use enough' means a lot more than 2 systems.
Yeah. But "what if" there were at most 3 systems/mailers (and the rest users) in the world - one for each main zone? ;)
Technically, they could implement all the proposals and that would be their standard - and as long those things don't break some of the older systems should a 4th want to come onboard, then who is to say they are not following standards? ;)
> You and Stas have something unique. There is no reason to not make a > proposal on how it operates.
That would probably take place far from now. But currently it is just a tosser project that complies to existing FTN standards. The Telegram "app" is not modified. But maybe in the future someone could build a version that features things like taglines, quoting options, etc..
> ..In ASIAN_LINK there is a discussion you are in > relating to cell phones and SD cards. An example of a 3rd party utility > following relevant portions of a 'standard' to inter-operate with TELEGRAM, > would be a case of that if it allowed for use of SIM card storage (or > pluggin mini-pin external HD?) to store a bigger backlog of messages than > their own device could handle.
Correct. Better "offline" capability would be interesting. That could break that advantage of portability though. But right now, the build-in S)earch of the current app is pretty good - as long as one is still connected online.
> All I really know about TELEGRAM is it works and I have all the same > moderator controls as expected. Including to remove a user if they prove > problematic (which none have been). To me, it's a unique OLR type setup. > Not really different from using Bluewave etc. on the end seen from others. > Nice job!
Thank for saying that. I am not sure if the developer follows this echo, but I'll forward your sentiments. --- SBBSecho 3.12-Linux * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757.2)
