Eric Armstrong wrote:
> I think that's a good reason for identifying the modules
> and focusing on the APIs -- or, better, on protocol-based
> interactions. Had that been the case, the system could
> have been rewritten, module by module, over the years.
> pointed out. The use of topic maps and the like (that
> Jack and you understand a helluva lot better than I) should
> then make it possible to define non-demoninational standards,
> so those modules can be written in newer and better languages
> as time goes on.
Yep. Increasingly my thought. If OHS is to be a broad
standard, there will be plenty of manpower to recode
it in different languages. It's the standards, the
architecture, the mapping of the core.
As to modules, well ... a lot of my work rebuilding
ecommerce web sites involves ripping *apart* huge
rigid unscalable constructs, and turning it into
a system of: modules. Modules still work.
Nicholas Carroll Email: email@example.com Alternate: firstname.lastname@example.org ______________________________________________________
Community email addresses: Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com Subscribe: unrev-IIemail@example.com Unsubscribe: unrev-IIfirstname.lastname@example.org List owner: unrev-IIemail@example.com
Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 04 2001 - 21:44:05 PST