Re: [ogpx] Tourist use case

["Infinity Linden (Meadhbh Hamrick)" <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 15:46, Vaughn Deluca <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Joshua Bell <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Sean Hennessee <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Morgaine
>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Infinity Linden (Meadhbh Hamrick)
>>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> also. just a show of hands. who's planning on implementing the tourist
>>>>>> model?
>
>  [...]
>
>>
>> There are two distinct definitions in extremely common use on the 'net:
>>
>> (1) to implement: write the code for something
>> (2) to implement: configure and deploy code for something
>>
>> My interpretation of this thread is that Infinity is using definition #1,
>> Sean and Morgaine are using definition #2. Infinity is asking specifically:
>> "who will write the code that adds support for the protocol to a piece of
>> software?" not "who will make use of software that implements the protocol?"
>
> *ahum* I was most definitely using  definition #2. Yet, i *can* code, and
> given the importance of this aspect, i am certainly willing to assist in
> making this use case happen. However, i am not a professional programer, but
> just a scientist, coding my own analysis softeware. So i am likely to need a
> bit of help from some friends :)

okay. my bad. i was just kinda shocked by what i perceived as an
assertion by morgaine that there was going to be a 1:1 relation
between developers and users. i'll let her make that case if that's
what she really believes, but will assume she interpreted my question
to be "who's interested in deploying services that implement protocol
transactions in accord with the tourist model?" rather than "who's
interested in implementing the tourist model in code?" as it was
intended to mean.

i think one of the most important outcomes of this process will be an
open standard that anyone can implement without royalty payments,
including FLOSS developers. an operator like linden cannot be all
things to all people and implement every feature. but maybe in the
future we'll be able to point people to OpenSim and say "we can't
implement the feature you want, but maybe you can implement it
yourself using this nice codebase the community has put together for
you." and then, "hey look over there! there's an archipelago of
tourist sites or here's our more locked down world. maybe it makes
sense for you to deploy here."

i think if we can do that, we will have won. (and not just SL or
OpenSim or realXtend or whomever, but all of us.)

> On the other hand, i am convinced that a proper implementation of the SL use
> case (this time in the sense of definition  #1) will generate about  all the
> code we need for the tourist case. The difference between the SL model and
> the tourist model is largely at the policy level.  But when we get down to
> the specs, that will become clear soon enough.
> Regarding the coding, i think Agent Domain code was written this summer. Is
> that available somewhere? i would like to have a look at that, to get a
> better feel for the size of the problem.
> -Vaughn
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ogpx mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>
>