Some more words on section: Current State.

Author: christianparpart

spec/vt-good-image-protocol.tex

@@ -55,11 +55,6 @@ \section{Motivation} % {{{
 as a largest common denominator, with implementation adaptability on both ends - terminal and
 application side.
 
-This image protocol specification aims to be future proof with regards to the young generation
-of terminal users, as well as simple enough to be widely accepted and adopted on the terminal side
-as well as client side, yet allowing future extensions to this protocol
-without breaking compatibility to existing implementations.
-
 % }}}
 \section{Prior art and current state} % {{{
 
@@ -127,6 +122,21 @@ \subsection{Kitty image protocol}
     \item Hard coded image storage pool to 320 MB (per screen buffer).
 \end{itemize}
 
+None of the above image protocols are a good candiate. iTerm2's image protocol is very simple and
+can be rendered by specifying grid cell sizes instead of relying on pixels, but lags some
+flexibility.
+
+Kitty image protocol on the other hand does provide very good flexibility but is a way too complex which
+would hinder broader adoptability and conforming implementations. There is also an added complexity
+(such as support for Z-axis) and the ability to send images in a way that does not work trivially
+when the terminal is connected to remote clients (such as via SSH). This all seems to hinder
+adopting a otherwise very flexible image protocol.
+
+The \GoodImageProtocol specification aims to be future proof with regards to the young generation
+of terminal users, as well as simple enough to be widely accepted and adopted on the terminal side
+as well as client side, yet allowing future extensions to this protocol
+without breaking compatibility to existing implementations.
+
 % }}}
 \section{Requirements} % {{{