[sldev] Script to client channel.

[Tony Dodd]

It seems to me that if it is worth making these changes at all then some
effort should be put into engineering a system where users can apply several
viewer extensions from different authors. In general, of course, the
architecture of the viewer would not support a completely general system
like that: but would it be possible to work out some way for both Dimentox
and me to provide viewer enhancements that are simple client side controls -
nothing as thoroughgoing as Restrained Life - and have reasonable assurance
that we are not treading on one another's toes and that users who want to
use both our controls will be able to do so? This would mean perhaps
installing in llviewermessage.cpp a suitable common dispatcher for viewer
messages to a queue of listeners to which extensions could add handlers, or
at any rate finding some way to avoid every patch needing to patch the
system's downstream message handling.

As regards return traffic it is very easy to arrange for the viewer to send
a string on some selected channel, though I suppose in the interests of
clarity and security it might be better to add client to server messages
with a new event type.

Maldoror Bowman
    

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sldev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com 
> [mailto:sldev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of 
> Thomas Shikami
> Sent: 16 February 2009 13:50
> To: Second Life Developer Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [sldev] Script to client channel.
> 
> Dahlia Trimble wrote:
> > how about llOwnerSay() encoded messages?
> >
> > Or how about an off screen hud with prims that display 
> invisible text 
> > via llSetText(), but the client could read the text and act on it?
> >
> > I think what you want could be done without server modifications.
> I'd go for the server modifications and what I see from the 
> discussion here, the thing wanted is something like 
> llViewerSay(integer channel, string message), which would be 
> sent to the viewer but would not be displayed anywhere in the 
> user interface at all. It's inner workings would be something 
> like llOwnerSay, but modified in a way to not affect the user 
> interface in any way and giving no indication that it was used. 
> Customized viewers would be able to accept these messages 
> from prims the user owns and do some work on it. It could 
> make a big change to RestrainedLife as well, as things could 
> be changed in a way to work like llViewerSay(RLV, "@version=" 
> + (string)random) instead of the visible 
> llOwnerSay("@version=" + (string)random); For that channel, 
> there could be a channel number registry on wiki, where 
> people add their channel number to reach their viewers and 
> optionally publish the protocol that can be used with the 
> viewer. llViewerSay should be restricted like llOwnerSay to 
> only send the message to the owner of the prim. Maybe even 
> restricted like llMapDestination to only work on attachments 
> or during a touch event.
> The purpose of a llViewerSay is just one simple requirement, 
> the ability to send a message to a customized viewer, without 
> using one of the already existing channels which would be 
> visible in regular viewers.
> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated 
> posting privileges
>