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

Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> Tue, 03 May 2011 19:40 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 173DEE0744 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:40:26 -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 VomEHBD8Mx2z for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:40:25 -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 BC688E076D for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2011 12:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so224148pzk.31 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 May 2011 12:40:24 -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 :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RHpUYpniWwBMVSCBI5sZ/s+iAHWiZXq3ZftQgMeMG9c=; b=PxAYTezF/TRby2cwfbK44IbkBvCF9i74YJPF3uqiwIvCm6lWbLmPrVVtL93PDMJwid zs6HCaUXEWaoRa2wc9ThVQLu3S25yLGixNiJ3etH2gXcJ0sXWNWaMv6xNAZdWHj4aq2G 6/lbc5K/LMvEoQJpBuFeV07eniDJh7irSZKSQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=olXxYJ5giEa9Sf9O2+5T3JHyIaXCNaj+YgElX38LL7RzRKJLudt3nUAI3zqxn0nfmp QVXsnG77PGmZe+BkByolU8DzBMnFobZhvzlS4Y51/hc01DftG2q58HgKlY19a4D7Jb5Z pOrQMQOdRYldXsaG5Gd46YyOcTV05FaznkklM=
Received: by 10.68.9.196 with SMTP id c4mr286288pbb.461.1304451624442; Tue, 03 May 2011 12:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.50] ([70.133.70.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z2sm222771pbp.48.2011.05.03.12.40.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 03 May 2011 12:40:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4DC059E3.7050408@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 12:39:15 -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: Meadhbh Hamrick <ohmeadhbh@gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=CBNi1NqNEjRE+Ed8MbP00h_QpXA@mail.gmail.com> <4DC051BA.5020501@gmail.com> <BANLkTi=PXwerrefOVhf_6vuFm0wwm25N3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=PXwerrefOVhf_6vuFm0wwm25N3g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: vwrap@ietf.org
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 19:40:26 -0000

With how I used LLIDL, yes. That's good enough for generic example of flow.

I would further call that XML context with symbolic representation in 
content is highly abstract and atomical in the same instance. This has 
been demonstrated by dynamic compilers. Why avoid the obvious?

On 05/03/2011 12:11 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
> right. but that was before we decided as a group to rewrite the
> charter and intro doc.
>
> i guess my question to you would be, are you interested in keeping
> LLSD as part of VWRAP?
> --
> meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
> @OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * OhMeadhbh@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Dzonatas Sol<dzonatas@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> vwrap mailing list
>> vwrap@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>
>>      
>    


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