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