MOO-cows Mailing List Archive


Re: MUD system -> MUD system conversion...

On Fri, 15 Mar 1996, Matthew Sanderson wrote:
> As far as I can see, the differences between text-based VRs (MOO and
> DikuMUD, for example) are such that the only information that is meaningful
> to both systems and therefore able to be converted, is the most basic such
> as location/contents, name, description, and perhaps rudimentary
> inheritance.
> I don't see that a (probably quite complex) system of converting from one
> M*'s internal format into this necessarily very restrictive high-level
> format, then back down to another M*'s format, would be very useful.
> Surely if the only things that can be converted over are extremely basic,
> the conversion would be easier done by hand, or with a simple script.
> One high-level language to describe all M*s is too ambitious IMHO.
> A hack that converts, say, a DikuMUD db into a MOO db might be a more
> useful and easily attainable goal.

There are groups of muds which share the same concepts in topology 
design.  For instance, a room is MOO is similar to a place in Cold.  The 
idea is to cater to these similarities.  Diku is as far from a similarity 
as you can get, and its not intended for converting diku topology.

What is dumped would not have much depth, but it would get 90% of the 
grunt work converted to a db, if somebody wanted to convert.


Home | Subject Index | Thread Index