1  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  ...  36  |   Order by default

Apr 13, 2001, 2:09am

Why don't you read the help files? After entering all your stuff, you have
to enable transforms, there are a few checkboxes for that, and update. *end
of message*

*wonders why he took the trouble to write help files in the first place*

XelaG

[View Quote]

Apr 15, 2001, 11:15am

BTW, I forgot to mention this: to avoid systematic vandalising of tourist
property, xelagot does not allow you to delete it using the Survey Manager
unless you have Eminent Domain. You will not be able to delete the tourist
property to rebuild it as a citizen. You can copy it to a different
location, or use a script to delete it.


[View Quote]

Feb 26, 2004, 3:25pm

FYI:

* transitions from explicit to implicit animations now broadcast
sequence 0 between the explicits and implicits (important for bots to
indicate when an explicit animation has finished executing)

Alex

Feb 27, 2004, 12:05am

On 26 Feb 2004 20:53:32 -0500, "ep0ch" <deltawolf at deltawolf.com>
[View Quote] >Not really a priority for me...right now im bashing my head in trying to
>figure out why AW_EVENT_UNIVERSE_ATTRIBUTES wont work...tis a mystery and i
>must be sherlock! But good to know, ill make sure to include that into my
>bot.
>
>
>- Ep0ch

ever thought of installing the event handler? :)

Alex

>
[View Quote]

Mar 13, 2004, 12:24pm

I did mention problems in global mode, but this one is new to me, as I
never experienced it (or noticed it). The problems I mentioned are in
avatar_add/change/delete and do not imply delays, they imply
confusions, ommissions, etc. They seem to be due to poor validation
of reconnections of same-session avatars at world server level.

Alex

[View Quote] >There seems to be a huge delay in some instances with global mode and
>bots recieving the events. Sometimes they're not even captured at all..
>I know XelaG has said something about this but I'm wondering what the
>status on getting this fixed is, that's just horrible with a 5 minute
>delay sometimes.

Apr 15, 2001, 11:22am

ED = Eminent Domain

Avatar Add (someone comes into the bot's perception area) and Avatar Delete
(someone leaves) cannot be modified. But you can write a script to manage
messaging (or build a bot that specifically does that). For that you have
to specify very clear criteria about what the bot must do etc... It's not
very clear from your message here what you want :)

[View Quote]

Apr 16, 2001, 10:15am

[View Quote] Well just turn off the message. If you have a xelagot, read the help files
before starting a thread here :)

Mar 29, 2004, 4:18am

You have to call aw_wait regularly. I set the parameter to 0, and use
a windows timer to call it. I call this the bot's hearbeat. Once a
second is minimal, in my opinion. If you don't call it within a
minute or so, you get a no connection message. I'm not sure how you
handle your code, so I can't say much more :)

By default, you have a 3 bot allowance as a cit, this should not be a
problem. You can test in Xelagon if you like (my world), there is no
creepy Custom HIV bot there to eject yours.

AW_MY_STATE is simply the sort of implicit sequence (animation) type
that the bot will show to browsers, by default 0 (walking). It can be
walking, running, flying, etc. Each state has it partical set of
animations, for example, walking includes the walk, idle and wait
sequences, flying includes the movement of flying (fly= in the
avatars.dat file), and hovering when the bot is not moving (hover=).
Check the enums AW_AVATAR_STATES in the H file, they only work in 3.4
or higher worlds and browsers.

Alex

On 28 Mar 2004 23:32:12 -0500, "roomie" <lisastump at netscape.net>
[View Quote] >Hi Everyone,
>
>I am an experienced C/C++ programmer new to bot programming. I have
>created a bot which seems to login OK, but I can't "see" the bot when
>I'm in the same world. I handle the AW_EVENT_AVATAR_ADD and the bot
>gets a callback for my avatar - good. When I make the bot try to say
>something or whisper something to my avatar, I get 439 -
>RC_NO_CONNECTION - bad.
>
>Do I have to have certain permissions to run a bot (I'm a new citizen)?
>Do I have to be in a particular world (I am testing in AW)?
>What is the AW_MY_STATE attribute for (my bot seems to have state 0)?
>
>Thanks!!
>- me

Apr 2, 2004, 5:28am

On 1 Apr 2004 21:54:02 -0500, "brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org>
[View Quote] >Wasn't there a bot that was adapted by HamFon or so in the late 90s that
>used ELIZA to attempt to hold a conversation with a user? I wonder where
>that bot went....
>
>-Brant

Hopefully to the trashbin, it was the most annoying bot I've ever
encountered :)

Alex

Apr 17, 2001, 12:36am

You are welcome to make a tutorial :)

I myself spent 3 years making my bot. Free and for no money. I do not have
time nor the ability to create what you suggest, nor do I appreciate your
comments (or are you prepared to pay for my time and dedication?). If my
help pages do not help enough, that is tough cheese.

XelaG



[View Quote]

Apr 4, 2004, 11:42am

Magine,

I can't get botgrams in the new SDK build 37 to work either, same
reason 31 Not logged in

CCing to devteam

Alex

On 3 Apr 2004 20:50:43 -0500, "magine" <magine at turtleflight.com>
[View Quote] >Anyone get bot grams working? I get a "not logged in" error, I assume
>that means the recipient is not logged in...except I test it with my own
>ID, and I certainly do have bots logged in.

Apr 4, 2004, 9:23am

Finally AWI has added an explicit event to signal universe
disconnections: AW_EVENT_UNIVERSE_DISCONNECT, which does not return an
error code as far as I know.

Until now, one needed to test the session number. If it turned to 439
RC_NO_CONNECTION after a successfull login, this was a sign of
disconnection. Complicated, because it always turns to that reason
while logging in.

Long awaited, finally here :)

Alex

Apr 4, 2004, 9:47am

The effective maximum length of text that can be sent in botgrams is
1000 characters. (+ 1 char for terminating 0x0).

Alex

Apr 4, 2004, 4:00pm

The following reason codes are used by the botgram function and
callback, according to Chrispeg. Some we know, others are sent by the
universe server:

RC_TELEGRAM_BLOCKED = 85,
RC_TELEGRAM_TOO_LONG = 86,
RC_MESSAGE_LENGTH_BAD = 4,
RC_NOT_LOGGED_IN = 31,
RC_NO_SUCH_CITIZEN = 3,
RC_CALL_LIMIT_EXCEEDED = 137,
RC_JOIN_REFUSED = 250,
RC_BOTGRAM_SENT_TO_NONE = 138,

Alex

Apr 4, 2004, 4:03pm

BTW,

RC_NOT_LOGGED_IN is also used when the universe has disabled botgrams,
so the errors Magine and I were getting in AW were not problems with
the SDK, but simply a misleading reason code. I tested the botgram in
DLP, and it worked fine there.

Alex

[View Quote] >The following reason codes are used by the botgram function and
>callback, according to Chrispeg. Some we know, others are sent by the
>universe server:
>
> RC_TELEGRAM_BLOCKED = 85,
> RC_TELEGRAM_TOO_LONG = 86,
> RC_MESSAGE_LENGTH_BAD = 4,
> RC_NOT_LOGGED_IN = 31,
> RC_NO_SUCH_CITIZEN = 3,
> RC_CALL_LIMIT_EXCEEDED = 137,
> RC_JOIN_REFUSED = 250,
> RC_BOTGRAM_SENT_TO_NONE = 138,
>
>Alex

Apr 4, 2004, 4:25pm

This callback, triggered (if installed) by aw_botgram_send(), is
typically quite useless, as it only gives you an error message and no
reference at all to which botgram (destination or text) this error
applies, i.e. it does not refer you directly to parameters set before
calling aw_botgram_send(). It's a pity, because this complicates
matters.

Alex

Apr 10, 2004, 10:03pm

No it isn't. It isn't even properly up to date in html format, some
links point to Roland at activeworlds.com .

[View Quote] >I was just wondering if the AW SDK documentation is available for
>download in Adobe PDF format. If not, would anyone be interested in
>converting it to PDF? You wouldn't need to go to the AW SDK site every
>time you wanted to look something up, as PDF files are searchable.
>
>Formatting would be different, however. Everything would need to go on
>one page (instead of branched off onto different pages), but using a
>feature of the PDF format there is a way to make navigation almost
>identical.
>
>Builderz
>Web, Movie & ActiveWorlds Hosting - http://www.3dhost.net

Apr 11, 2004, 10:21am

I miss one important thing in this event: AW_BOTGRAM_FROM_SESSION.
This is the one attribute that could help pinpoint the sender
accurately, but it does not exist :(

Apr 11, 2004, 10:24am

Similarly for the USERLIST: a session number (=0 maybe if not logged
in) would be excellent.

[View Quote] >I miss one important thing in this event: AW_BOTGRAM_FROM_SESSION.
>This is the one attribute that could help pinpoint the sender
>accurately, but it does not exist :(

Apr 11, 2004, 10:48pm

You confuse me: botgrams go from one bot to other bots, they have
nothing to do (in the current practice) with invite, although maybe in
origin they come from the same thought... at least, that is the
current implementation in the SDK, as far as I can understand it.

Alex

On 11 Apr 2004 17:00:41 -0500, "strike rapier"
[View Quote] >It was never intended to exist...
>
>Botgrams were origionally designed to invite a user to enter the universe at
>another persons location, without them needing to have AW open to recieve
>it, only the bot invite.exe. This feature was intended for a different
>universe.
>
>The general idea is to send from one citizenship to another, not from one
>session to another.
>
>While I agree that one to one session methods would be absolutly brilliant,
>this is not what the feature was designed for.
>
>- MR
>
[View Quote]

Apr 12, 2004, 1:02am

Thanks for the explanation, I was not invited or allowed to
participate in the alpha period. If you read the SDK notes, you will
see that the current bot SDK 27 specifies an ID of 0 for botgrams, and
from what I could experiment in DLP (not in AW, they have this
disabled), botgrams are from bot to bot... Invite is still available
in the browser, although I've never tested it.

Alex

On 11 Apr 2004 20:20:52 -0500, "strike rapier"
[View Quote] >'Invite' as it first existed was a seperate application, 'invite.exe' which
>was installed with the alpha browsers that I still have kicking about
>somewhere. When you invited someone to join you who was not in-world the
>universe server would send a botgram with a specific type (hence the type
>id) to identify who sent it, and their coordinates. Hence allowing the user
>to join them even if they did not have the browser open to recieve the join.
>
>In alpha browsers you do not launch aworld.exe... you launch invite.exe...
>which logs in then launches aworld.exe... if you get what i mean... uh....
>
>- MR
>
[View Quote]

Apr 12, 2004, 1:13am

Strike, AW has invite (from browser to browser) active, in the message
of the invite you receive (a standard message) it even mentions the
world you are invited to go to. Botgrams are disabled in aw, and the
botgram code only mentions citnum of the bot, and a telegram style
message (you dont have a message = telegram style) in invite. The
botgram message can be up to 1000 bytes long. So I think it's two
different things... but the devil knows, AW is not very informative
lately.

[View Quote] >Thanks for the explanation, I was not invited or allowed to
>participate in the alpha period. If you read the SDK notes, you will
>see that the current bot SDK 27 specifies an ID of 0 for botgrams, and
>from what I could experiment in DLP (not in AW, they have this
>disabled), botgrams are from bot to bot... Invite is still available
>in the browser, although I've never tested it.
>
>Alex
>
>On 11 Apr 2004 20:20:52 -0500, "strike rapier"
[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2004, 4:30pm

Devteam,

it would be great for bots to be able to know beforehand if botgrams
are enabled in a universe, the current situation is you need to send
first and get a nonsensical reason code 31 RC_NOT_LOGGED_IN. A
suggestion would be to have a bool in the universe attributes that can
be tested by bots before sending a botgram, something like
AW_UNIVERSE_BOTGRAMS_ENABLED :)

Alex
(posted in beta and emaild to devteam)

Apr 13, 2004, 9:07pm

What has this to do with my posting?

On 13 Apr 2004 18:05:11 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >Botgrams were never disabled; a simple bug in the universe server caused them to not function. They should work in the main AW Universe.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 13, 2004, 11:26pm

*probably* vs *pointless*. If you are not sure, why don't you inform
yourself? I do not know myself, I just suggest an elegant solution.
Nice to know they solved a bug, now if AWI would care to answer
themselves about something they know, it would be nice.

Alex

On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >I'm simply saying since the uniserver bug inadvertenly "disabled" botgrams, there's probably no actual option to disable them; so the addition of this attribute would be pointless.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 12:55am

BTW, Tony, I'm not trying to antagonise you. I'm getting very weary
of AWI not directly addressing us in the ngs about these matters. I
have had to go mostly by hearsay and own testing in this new SDK
upgrade, making mistakes, fixing them, stumbling again, through lack
of proper documentation and feedback. This is not only insecure, it is
very tiresome, frustrating and wastes a lot of our time.

Alex

On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote] >I'm simply saying since the uniserver bug inadvertenly "disabled" botgrams, there's probably no actual option to disable them; so the addition of this attribute would be pointless.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2004, 1:44am

An example: at the end of february, I emailed Bill Hoover asking when
we would have an SDK for 3.5, explaining also that I had added lots of
features to xelagot, and would like to know whether to wait for the
new SDK to make it available or to release it then. His reply was
"soon". I also emailed Will, who is in charge of the SDK, and never
got a reply from him. Since that day, I checked 3 or 4 times a day the
SDK web pages... on april 3rd, I saw there was a new SDK.... great.

Has anyone seen an official posting in this NG announcing the new SDK?
Has anyone seen a reply from AWI to the questions posted here?

I did get a reply from on one question I had: as from what world
server does the Mega cell limit apply. The answer I got from AWI was
64. The correct answer is 62 (with a higher maximum value than 64,
true, 8192 bytes, which was later brought back to 5000 bytes in 64).
This correct info I do not have from any of the people working for
AWI. Do we have to rely on hackers, third parties or hearsay to get
the info we need? Do we have to spy the SDK web pages to find out
when a new version is available?

The same applies to the beta browsers and world servers. The universe
message says at present: "Welcome to the Active Worlds Universe! 3.5
is now in open beta!! Download the latest builds of the browser, world
server and SDK from
http://www.activeworlds.com/products/download.asp". What builds, are
we to guess when new ones come? The beta ng has not received ONE
notice of new beta builds since times inmemorial.

I think AWI should really get their act together on this. There a
lots of people very actively trying to contribute to the enhancement
of AWI, and we need proper feedback to do so.

Alex

[View Quote] >BTW, Tony, I'm not trying to antagonise you. I'm getting very weary
>of AWI not directly addressing us in the ngs about these matters. I
>have had to go mostly by hearsay and own testing in this new SDK
>upgrade, making mistakes, fixing them, stumbling again, through lack
>of proper documentation and feedback. This is not only insecure, it is
>very tiresome, frustrating and wastes a lot of our time.
>
>Alex
>
>On 13 Apr 2004 18:10:48 -0500, "tony m"
[View Quote]

Apr 18, 2004, 8:56am

My point is not the hackers, of course. It is that we should get the
correct and full information from AWI, not from other parties :)

Alex

On 17 Apr 2004 19:53:20 -0500, "strike rapier"
[View Quote] >
>Its hardly spying... but it is a lot more fun when certain hackers (we are
>all probably thinking of the same person) releases new information and
>various tools get released that have all the fun stuff in... (like the rest
>of the commands, lol)
>
>- MR
>

Apr 24, 2004, 5:41pm

Hello Devteam,

I have noticed a serious problem for universe caretakers using the bot
SDK to set universe options. Not only in the latest beta build 37,
but earlier 3.4 and maybe 3.3 ones too. If uni caretakers use the AW
Browser, this problem does not occur.

The bot SDK reads and writes Latest Browser using the values of Latest
2.2 browser:

aw_int(AW_UNIVERSE_BROWSER_RELEASE) does not give me the value of the
Latest Browser, it gives me the value of the Latest 2.2 Browser.

Further, if I do aw_universe_attributes_change() without changing any
of the values of the Browser parameters, the universe server changes
the value of Latest Browser to match that of Latest 2.2 Browser. If
both values were originally the same, you do not notice the problem,
of course.

I think this problem is serious, because bots are being used to change
universe options, often only the world message... if they have
different values for Latest Browser and Latest 2.2 Browser, they will
be unknowingly changing the Latest Browser value.

As I said, this problem does not occur when you read or set options
using the browser.

Alex

Apr 25, 2004, 12:37pm

Hi again,

I did some more testing with the bot SDK, and I think I can pinpoint
where the error is.

When the aw.dll decodes the packet received from the universe server,
it makes a mistake, and assigns internally the value received for
"Latest 2.2 Browser" to "Latest Browser" (as well as assigning it to
the correct field). Therefore, when the bot retrieves
aw_int(AW_UNIVERSE_BROWSER_RELEASE), it gets the wrong value.

The encoding to send back universe attributes to the server works
correctly in this respect. The problem there is that because
internally the value of "Latest Browser" is wrong, it gets encoded
wrongly. If I change it using the bot, it gets sent correctly.

Hopes this gets fixed soon!

Cheers,
Alex



[View Quote] >Hello Devteam,
>
>I have noticed a serious problem for universe caretakers using the bot
>SDK to set universe options. Not only in the latest beta build 37,
>but earlier 3.4 and maybe 3.3 ones too. If uni caretakers use the AW
>Browser, this problem does not occur.
>
>The bot SDK reads and writes Latest Browser using the values of Latest
>2.2 browser:
>
>aw_int(AW_UNIVERSE_BROWSER_RELEASE) does not give me the value of the
>Latest Browser, it gives me the value of the Latest 2.2 Browser.
>
>Further, if I do aw_universe_attributes_change() without changing any
>of the values of the Browser parameters, the universe server changes
>the value of Latest Browser to match that of Latest 2.2 Browser. If
>both values were originally the same, you do not notice the problem,
>of course.
>
>I think this problem is serious, because bots are being used to change
>universe options, often only the world message... if they have
>different values for Latest Browser and Latest 2.2 Browser, they will
>be unknowingly changing the Latest Browser value.
>
>As I said, this problem does not occur when you read or set options
>using the browser.
>
>Alex

1  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  ...  36  |   Order by default