[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [osmic] Re: [osmic] Rearrange command

Kenichi Unnai wrote:
> Bek Oberin wrote:
>> I know I've been grumping in the last few days, but it seems that
>> this project is going insane.  Ted doesn't understand the
>> difference between protocol design and idea design and tells me the
>> opposite to what Xanni told me; the 6 months of work that I was
>> promised seems to have melted into a frantic week-or-two that I may
>> or may not ever get paid for ...
> Hmm I can understand what you feel, but I believe Ted shouldn't be
> blamed for that.  I know he is not an absolute specialist of
> computer science, but on the other hand, he can provide many
> exciting visions which ordinary technical people couldn't proide at
> all.  ( but I'm sure you guys know those stuffs very much......  )
> So, I think what we should do on the current stage is just
> acknowledging "the protocol design & idea design is different", and

Hey, I never said any DIFFERENT.  I just want to re-write the
protocol.  I never said anything about the idea design (Correct
English would probably be 'concept design', incidentally).  The
concept is Ted's thing and it's not my business to tell Ted what to
do.  The PROTOCOL implementation is our thing.  That's what they asked
me to comment on, so I did.

I was just asking about 'Rearrange' because I wanted to know, I'm like
that - I ask things when I want to know them.

> is it time to re-define the entire protocol from scratch?  I don't
> think it's too late.  

Neither do I.  The reason all this came up, incidentally, was that
they asked me to document the current protocol.  Part of what I wrote
was a list of its shortcomings and recommendations for the future.

> Also might be better if we could map the
> software design using UML.

What's UML?  I haven't heard of it.

> And I hope this discussion will give Ted some new & clear
> improvement for his software design paradigm.  But he is stubborn, I
> like that, though.....;-)

Each to their own!

I find it strange that somebody who wants to invent computer stuff
refuses to learn about computers.  But, like I said, that's his 
business - not mine!

> Now that I've got familiar with HTTP protocol well, ( not at the
> time, around 2 years ago when I was striving to create the osmic
> software ) I can see HTTP is a very reasonable , simple and
> extendable protocol.


> But Ted's proposed system would bring something which current HTTP
> design can't provide at all.  That's the point, as you all know.

I didn't mean that we USE HTTP/1.1, just to take it as a good basis
and design the OSMIC protocol to be -similar- in how it works.  Because,
like you said, HTTP's a good protocol.

> And also I recognize, as we're going into the core part of osmic (or
> xanadu network system), the more we can see contradictions, and weak
> points of them..........but I still believe lots of treasure are
> sleeping in those paradigm.

I'll defer to you and Ted on that one.  I don't really understand it
much, I guess.  It looks to me like OSMIC is two things (transclusion,
and the primedia idea) that got tangled up in bed.  But I think that's
because I don't understand it.

And just because the way Ted does stuff is not the way -I- would do
stuff, doesn't make it bad.  It makes it Ted's stuff which is, after
all, the whole point.

Umm, that got tangled up.

I'm just trying to say that I'm not much of an advocate or convert or
whatever the right word is.  I just program it!

> So it might be very productive, powerful approach to make it very
> clear ( like being a document or list ) what kind of things are
> good/bad.

Like I said, I already did.  I don't think I should post the list here
because they paid me to write it, but if Ted or Xanni wants to post it
I think that would be a good idea.  It's a very detailed list.

> Wow there're so many suggestions & opinions!



: --Hacker-Neophile-Eclectic-Geek-Grrl-Queer-Disabled-Boychick--
: gossamer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx   http://www.tertius.net.au/~gossamer/
: Inhibitions are just our way of protecting our selves from the
: world.  Sometimes they should be listened to, when they're
: really telling you what you really feel deep down. Otherwise,
: they need to be met, and handled back into their proper place -
: as cautions rather than barricades to experience
: -- Marian Starwatcher