Re: [vwrap] about abstract type systems... llsd and dsd

Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> Tue, 03 May 2011 19:05 UTC

Return-Path: <dzonatas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B010E06B1 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z3KncHKj3e-7 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02F07E067F for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so208094pzk.31 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 May 2011 12:05:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MDGYoLL1AZmD5i/QkOGKpATaejTxv8mCNIJmkt1XwH8=; b=YfBKlFhAWyrmtzHbEbdkHUbqSM9N834D1fUA7Q8rOuRgVpHLkI2/033B42dkXckUw9 SVx9AOjZqYWJjwM+eSo3QH8y1yVKW2J3t8N5EZsD3JDsPTFEgQMxJE/GvLwxw5+XHoir GvTi0RrVfbCxLgXSAlRGrlnIE8F3NrgT3FsE0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Xh2lXFEdsfRxCJYniXQkbxMMWcFlNeyGHPkeCOzQU8oKG406c6b+0hZleLxl2P6BgT LOSMoMPgPi7ldX3NfZwmjyjFX9WHScEb1dgiYWbs50xjoofoGh+EsKyBEjAXxaTRd0MP mIuS43FEwAkD+P0vdvK/GDmd9Bgh9vgH/Wr70=
Received: by 10.68.47.5 with SMTP id z5mr232392pbm.450.1304449533340; Tue, 03 May 2011 12:05:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.50] ([70.133.70.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r5sm202625pbe.101.2011.05.03.12.05.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 03 May 2011 12:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4DC051BA.5020501@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 12:04:26 -0700
From: Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110307 Icedove/3.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vwrap@ietf.org
References: <BANLkTi=CBNi1NqNEjRE+Ed8MbP00h_QpXA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=CBNi1NqNEjRE+Ed8MbP00h_QpXA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [vwrap] about abstract type systems... llsd and dsd
X-BeenThere: vwrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <vwrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap>
List-Post: <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 19:05:35 -0000

On 05/03/2011 07:25 AM, Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
> so... when you write your VWRAP implementation, are you going to use
> LLSD or DSD. why? why not?
>    

Already implemented LLSD last year and deployed. Wrote Snowglobe.Scalar 
in C# that implents LLSD read/write from buffers/streams and native C# 
usage in familar format as used in the Snowglobe/Snowstorm C++ source. 
The source is in Icesphere. Also already started to move Icesphere and 
my contributions for Snowglobe/Snowstorm to github (where we can fork 
together). Others can find VWRAP, LLSD, and the HTTP server in 
Snowglobe/Snowstorm with what I started as combined queries (what SPDY 
doesn't do) between frames.

I wrote my experience with pro/cons on this list that seemed unanswered. 
Have you looked at the LLIDL in my documentation and notice how the 
combined queries worked?

Noticed your last message here: 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap/current/msg00775.html

Further straw-man without implementation, I can't give you any yes or no 
answer on that. There's no specific IETF rule, yet demonstrated flow 
seems what other WGs expect.


-- 
--- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant