Talk:RFB (protocol)

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Old RFB version documents

The old versions of the RFB documents are only in the wayback machine and on someone's personal website. Anyone want to volunteer to archive them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.5.113.131 (talk) 15:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Paragraph

The first paragraph is a direct copy of the first paragraph of the RFB specification. Should this be changed? 57.80.10.165 (talk) 15:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see a copyright statment at the top or bottom of the protocol document and it is such a short paragraph that it is unlikely to be a problem. They do not seem to have any objection to other sites hosting copies of the older versions of the spec either. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and Paste

I just transmitted some cyrillic letters using cut and paste over RFB. I am going to guess that the Latin-1 limitation only applies to version 3.8 and below, not to higher numbered versions. Is it worth amending this? 82.71.34.4 (talk) 23:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History

What year was this developed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.201.242.106 (talk) 21:25, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]