[cap-talk] Process object -> "Subject" - the saga continues

[David Hopwood]

Jed at Webstart wrote:
> I admit that's a pretty broad range of people, but so far
> I haven't heard anything that suggests that "subject" won't
> work and convey the added value that I'm looking for
> (the doer vs the doee) when I want to distinguish a
> active executing object from a passive non executing
> object (e.g. like a file or a directory or a port or ...).

In some systems, files, directories or ports are not passive
objects. In systems where they are, what's wrong with
"passive object"?

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk>