Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Please add support for Webcord #84

Open
Seme4eg opened this issue May 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Please add support for Webcord #84

Seme4eg opened this issue May 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
need-information Issue may be valid, given further research

Comments

@Seme4eg
Copy link

Seme4eg commented May 18, 2023

currently if using not discord, but webcord, elcord just can't find connection

@Zulu-Inuoe Zulu-Inuoe added the need-information Issue may be valid, given further research label May 18, 2023
@skykanin
Copy link
Contributor

Presumably @Seme4eg is talking about this 3rd party discord client https://github.com/SpacingBat3/WebCord

@Zulu-Inuoe
Copy link
Collaborator

Zulu-Inuoe commented May 19, 2023

Oh goodness I typed up a whole response this morning but never hit submit 🤦

So I tagged this with information needed because I read a little bit up on what Webcord is doing, and if I am understanding correctly, it sets up a web view that then navigates to Discord's web client. It then overrides several css and js things.
The thing is, the way Rich Presence works on Desktop is that the Discord client for desktop will open up an Inter Process Communication channel, such as a named pipe on Windows.
The web client does not (cannot) do this.
The only option would be then for Webcord to do so itself.

However, for it to do this, it would need to relay local rich presence status to Discord's servers itself. This sounds like it goes against the project's stated goals to NOT call Discord API. So I'm assuming there is no way to do this via Webcord.

The only other alternative is for elcord to speak directly with Discord's rich presence web API, which is far out of scope for elcord because then we run into TOS issues, as well as it being a pain to implement

So I'm leaving this issue open for the time being in case my information and assumptions are incorrect. I welcome being wrong somewhere!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
need-information Issue may be valid, given further research
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants