[cap-talk] "Same" key

David Hopwood david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk
Wed Feb 7 10:59:22 CST 2007

Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 02:30 +0000, David Hopwood wrote:
>>Mark S. Miller wrote:
>>>Bill Frantz wrote:
>>>>Are the following equivalencies substantially correct?
>>>>What the OS view calls an "Object", the language view calls a
>>>>What the OS view calls a "Facet", the language view calls an "Object".
>>>>The OS view does not use the term "Composite".
>>>>The language view uses the term "Facet" to mean a reference to an object
>>>>which is part of a composite.
>>Where is this "OS view" terminology coming from? I don't recognize it from
>>the documentation associated with any particular capability OS.
> At the very least this is the terminology that Coyotos, EROS, and KeyKOS
> have been using since the the late 1970's, though "facet id" used to be
> called "data byte".

If "facet" were renamed in the obj-cap terminology, would that be sufficient
for you to consider that there is no other conflict (since "composite" can
just as well be used to apply to operating systems)?

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

More information about the cap-talk mailing list