[e-lang] [cap-talk] "Comm system"

Kevin Reid kpreid at mac.com
Thu Mar 15 15:34:17 CDT 2007

On Mar 15, 2007, at 16:15, Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> Kevin Reid wrote:
>> Mark Miller said yesterday that he thought "comm system" was too
>> generic, that there are too many things it could refer to.
> [...]
>> He suggested the term "remoting system". "remoting" is an unfamiliar
>> term to me, and I'd like to hear others' thoughts on these choices of
>> terminology.
> Zooko wrote:
>> How about "remote object protocol"?
> I like this much better.  It is more specific and meaningful than
> both "comm system" and "remoting system".

The thing we're naming is not a protocol: it is rather an  
*implementation* of some protocol; an implementation which connects  
peers using that protocol to the object graph of the local vat.

For additional context:

The particular reason I brought this up is that I'm planing to make a  
document (on wiki.erights.org) which describes what a "comm system"  
must do to provide properly-behaving E references (e.g. record  
whenBroken messages), and I want to name it appropriately given the  
issue MarkM raised.

Kevin Reid                            <http://homepage.mac.com/kpreid/>

More information about the e-lang mailing list