Verification post to follow after the festivities today . More to come of my beautiful fianc . <| sep |> We ' re not women ! <| sep |> I agree with your characterization of what a terminal is historically . But we have no obligation to remain inside that historic paradigm given that we ' re all using software consoles right ? Your insistence that only ASCII aesthetic data be sent to a terminal is an artificial expectation . That is why I proposed the VT 100 Z . It is a well defined nonproprietary software console with it ' s own particular paradigm that can include binary data transmitted in a layer . Technically that data could be viewed with codepage 437 but it might not be visually parsable by the player if viewed . I remain resolved that there is NOTHING NH is currently doing that can ' t be done with the VT 100 Z paradigm . Yes I understand the word proprietary quite well . In this context it has everything to do with standards . It does not carry the connotation of visibility . Patents are proprietary but the explanation is open to the public . The Minecraft block ID ' s are proprietary i . e . private control but they are public info . In this context , proprietary has to do with who ? what ? can change the spec . An IETF doc is a great example of nonproprietary . RFC ' s are public spec not under private control . If we design and adopt and implement a VT 100 Z then it would in theory become a public spec nonproprietary . In contrast , the NH network protocol and all binary data xmit specs are proprietary privately controlled . Proprietary is more about control rather than visibility . Why is curses superior to VT 100 Z ?