Currently, servers are hard-coded in initHost <http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/extensions/irc/xul/content/static.js#112>. If ChatZilla were invokable with "irc://host[/#channel]"-style URLs, servers could be stored in bookmarks.
I'll take a look at bryner's finger: handler when I get the chance. Feel free to work up a patch :)
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
rginda, I propably won't fix this :-), but I have a URI-spec-draft for you: <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28649>
Now, that was nonsense. Here'S the correct URL: <http://www.w3.org/Addressing/draft-mirashi-url-irc-01.txt>
If I don't get around to complaining about that RFC would someone please send them this bug? that RFC is buggy! the following will fail miserably: <blockquote> irc://foobar.org:6665/secret,needkey references the IRC channel secret on server foobar.org. The connection takes place over port 6665, and the user is prompted for a channel key in order to reference the channel. </blockquote> It is ambiguous and messy. Saying that they will omit # & + because they need to be encoded: <blockquote> Since most IRC channels begin with the '#' character which is unsafe in a URL, it must be encoded. To avoid the cumbersome % encoding for most references, this draft omits the specific mention of a channel prefix in a <target> of type <chstring>. irc: URL scheme implementors must maintain a prefix variable (by default, '#', with '&' and '+' as other allowable values) to form channel names in accordance with RFC 1459. Further, the characters '!', ',', ':' and '@' are reserved in the irc: URL scheme and must also be encoded. </blockquote> is not a good reason for omitting them in the RFC. irc://irc.undernet.org/#macintosh irc://irc.erols.com/&macintosh these are both channels, irc.undernet.org can resolve to irc.erols.com but #macintosh and &macintosh are not equivalent. users should be , separated irc://irc.mozilla.org/qabot#qa,techbot1,techbot2#mozbot would be a reasonable URL. It could mean qabot in #qa; techbot1 and techbot2 in #mozbot on irc.mozilla.org and irc://irc.undernet.org/timeless#macintosh,chatzilla&chatzilla would also be valid. It could mean timeless on #macintosh and chatzilla on &chatzilla irc://irc.mozilla.org/@qabot#qa could mean the user qabot that is @#qa irc://irc.mozilla.org/+techbot1#qa could mean the user techbot1 that is +#qa : is also illegal in nicks. irc://newuser!identa%pass,moznewuser!identb%passb,chatnewuser!identc%passc@irc. mozilla.org:6667/@mozbot#mozilla could mean connect as newuser [fall back to moznewuser and then chatnewuser], and look for mozbot @#mozilla excuse the fact that these nicks are mostly real and that these channels mostly exist. also excuse the fact that most people don't visit &channels, but you can't exclude them from the URL spec just because. dcc chat can also be described using =victim irc://irc.undernet.org/=X the only thing I haven't described [that i can think of] is fully qualified names, thankfully nothing above precludes the following irc://irc.undernet.org/X@channels.undernet.org or irc://irc.undernet.org/@X@channels.undernet.org#macintosh or irc://irc.undernet.org/=X@channels.undernet.org these would describe fully qualified addressing. The fact that a channel has modes like +k do not seem to affect a url, but if people feel a need, then maybe: irc://localhost/#evil%keyphrase If anyone feels that i've omited any important pieces feel free to respond I do not object to irc://irc.erols.com:6666/ as it is logical. I do think that irc://irc.undernet.org should be valid, just like http://www.w3.org is valid. This comment should be cleaned up before being presented as an rfc. <nick>=<nickname>[!<ident>] <nicknames>=<nick>[,<nicklist>] <fullnick>=<nick>[@<nickhost>]|!<ident>@<nickhost> <nicklist>=<fullnick>[,<nicklist>] <nickstatus>=[@][+]<nick> <nickslist>=<nickstatus>[,<nickslist>] <channel>=[#|&|+]<string> <nickcontactlist>=(<nick>|=<nick>)[,<nicklist>] <channeldetails>=[<nicklist>]<channel>[%[<pass>]][,<channeldetails>] <ircserver>=<server>[:<port>] I do not think that http:// or http:/// are valid urls I don't think that irc:// or irc:/// should be either. so instead of irc://[<nicknames>@<ircserver>|<nicklist>|<ircserver>][/<channeldetails><nickco ntactlist>] I recommend irc:[//[<nicknames>@<ircserver>|<nicklist>]<ircserver>[/[<channeldetails><nickc ontactlist>]] this URL is not responsible for selecting the appropriate transport, that is left to the clients [ipv4, ipv6 ...] nor the routing.
mass marking chatzilla bugs future
Target Milestone: --- → Future
*MASS SPAM* Changing QA contact on all open or unverified ChatZilla bugs to me, David Krause, as I am now the QA contact for this component.
QA Contact: rginda → David
*** Bug 58452 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Summary: Implement protocol handler → Implement irc:// protocol handler
Note: This has been fixed , at least somewhat. Also see Protozilla for external IRC clients.
Marking this fixed. I'll address any bugs in the implementation as they come up.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Marking VERIFIED. Thanks for fixing it. This is a really nice feature!
really marking VERIFIED.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.