Why did you attack my post out-of-context? My full quote is:
[A really big problem in projects is the desire of "customers" to "gold-plate" .... .
Thus, every feature suggestion would have to be looked at - to see if it really adds to the intent of the product, or if it is just gold-plating.]
I never said that products should never have more features added.
And 90% of the scripting language (no - 99%) is based on text-based features. And those features (non-text) that have been added do, sometimes, enhance the text-based chat. And some other times they are used for other purposes. Fine. Good to see some people looking outside the box.
If you read on, I did highlight how WebCam support could be provided outside of mIRC, but in a fashion that is in concert with mIRC.
But the streamed content should not be sent in a sub-protocol of a sub-protocol. Why not stream the content in its own protocol, in parallel with the IRC chat?
So rather than bloat mIRC with some "gold-plate", why not engineer a way to use two optimised applications in parallel.
If you are going to debate any of the points I raise, then please have the courtesy to debate them in context.
Cheers
DK
