mIRC Home    About    Download    Register    News    Help

Print Thread
#50212 19/09/03 01:30 AM
C
Critt
Critt
C
It is quickly picking up a huge following -- Skype [ Skype ] has added the new linktag callto:// for use in MS Windows.

mIRC should embrace this trend and make these tags clickable when entered into the chat channel.

What do you think? [ <a href="callto://critt/" target="_blank">callto://critt/</a> ] cool

#50213 19/09/03 02:11 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,518
_
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
_
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,518
and this has what bearing on mirc? i mean if u want every lil new tag added and to mircs support for clicking... well id have to say this is a bad idea ... since i dont even think <a href="irc://network/channel" target="_blank">irc://network/channel</a> works as a clickable link.

#50214 19/09/03 03:52 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,973
K
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
K
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,973
Spam! >:\

#50215 19/09/03 04:45 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 136
M
Vogon poet
Offline
Vogon poet
M
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 136
There is a working link too click for networks
<a href="irc://irc.irc.net:6667/room">irc.irc.net Port 6667 channel #room>/a>
That works

#50216 19/09/03 04:48 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,958
W
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
W
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,958
He meant in mIRC itself. I agree with d3m0n re: the other links - no reason why mIRC should have to provide support for a programme that doesn't return the favour with reciprocal support.

#50217 19/09/03 08:39 PM
C
codemastr
codemastr
C
Umm "callto" first of all is not an official URL schema. Seeing as how there are dozens of official URL schemas that mIRC does NOT support, I think it would be stupid for mIRC to add some URL format introduced by some lame program.

#50218 02/01/04 05:17 PM
C
Critt
Critt
C
Quote:
I think it would be stupid for mIRC to add some URL format introduced by some lame program


Actually I think Microsoft introduced the [callto://] linktag with the introduction of their Netmeeting product several years ago.

#50219 02/01/04 10:51 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,518
_
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
_
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,518
u replied to this after 9 months? why bother? or did it take u that long to look up your supporting information?

#50220 02/01/04 11:33 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 191
N
Vogon poet
Offline
Vogon poet
N
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 191
Not quiet sure where you get the nine months from unless you were comparing the dates they registered on from looking at the date from the original post in the thread it has only been about 3.5 months.

#50221 03/01/04 01:49 AM
C
Critt
Critt
C
Quote:
or did it take u that long to look up your supporting information?


Not really. I trust you to know the answer no matter how long it takes.

Last edited by Critt; 03/01/04 02:01 AM.

Link Copied to Clipboard