> Hello Carol! > > ** On Friday 01.01.21 - 12:16, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Martin Foster: > > CS> 1 is a 'no'. There is no tracking on just why something someone > CS> proposed, never made standard. > > Usually, the why (with examples of usage) is present in the > preamble of the proposal. No? > > > CS> The FTSC doesn't 'reject proposals'. They vote on existing ones that a > CS> in use by enough to be a standard. > > Ah.. so, should the day arrive when only a minimum of 2 systems > exist, then as long as they agree to implement any proposal, that > becomes the new standard? :D > > -- > ../|ug >
The proposal just says why it was written. It can't address why it never (or hasn't yet) become a standard.
'In use enough' means a lot more than 2 systems.
You and Stas have something unique. There is no reason to not make a proposal on how it operates. Others may follow it with other tools, or potentially add other tools that work with it for the user end based on iOS in use (as an example). 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.
Maybe it would automatically archive older messages to alternative storage at a set point, something like that. They'd have to have enough on how the messages are stored and be part of the 'deleting older ones' process to shift it to copy to alternative storage.
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! xxcarol --- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)
