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

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
>