Re: [vwrap] is the group still interested in LLSD or DSD?

Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com> Wed, 04 May 2011 15:49 UTC

Return-Path: <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.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 95D01E0740 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 May 2011 08:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.876
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.876 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 q8hcX+7iRQu6 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 May 2011 08:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609DBE078F for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 May 2011 08:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so2833756qyk.10 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 May 2011 08:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=dgoGBtDMdinfKqR73i3ZLTbTc+EfiSQMG0DJYH9UJPg=; b=EfPU0vvLp7tz7Nig1ODsS8CgmhBqm29OVBo9XU6H8d3sVJVFUuaif64F6XCN4GwZSY PoMIGOrL18GSfeysw1gAbcFgzWERefP8KjEOf1pVBlKPhHqP91BRsZwtUYWKsDccwZx1 XTAtfz+qDkm9TpO1qqr+JgWxSHN2MVWN3YENk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=vzErOHv8PkNx4CZcEtwppDbYC4/d/NUYgMRJZpU1qDrNcHeahikyQgO3xpTtulnidm Jl6LB13U8aV3TCBFQiFNG2Nc2wEOfuxn20oK7gCz+OWLIcF1EE/6XrtQWMQ096hrj0MA rmrXAyJcuT8JjE4RzQueLUrQCu6LccUgy8liE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.198.8 with SMTP id em8mr1200790qab.305.1304524182636; Wed, 04 May 2011 08:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.66.212 with HTTP; Wed, 4 May 2011 08:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikTYpLHM=GAeGAVfufqZ5XT0FSAzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=g9T5q5bVgytpxRxuE=Oc9iG2F9w@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=K8-6oL-JJoPCfz0JjDpaRBpeOyg@mail.gmail.com> <4DC15504.3090503@gmail.com> <BANLkTikay4xhQoZs2L0uRLSXgUMfCE9yfA@mail.gmail.com> <4DC160F0.1030201@gmail.com> <BANLkTikTYpLHM=GAeGAVfufqZ5XT0FSAzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:49:42 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=kjBSuMjPcgfXTUvZ3iwmS1bN50Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
To: Meadhbh Hamrick <ohmeadhbh@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300fb16d81c6e204a275344a
Cc: vwrap@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [vwrap] is the group still interested in LLSD or 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: Wed, 04 May 2011 15:49:44 -0000

That's a far clearer question than you asked initially, and so its easier to
give a specific answer.  (Indeed, I already did before, in the second part
of my response.)

While I don't know exactly what DSD is (an RFC would be excellent!), if it's
just LLSD with another name then the type system of its underlying ADT is
not extensible, and therefore it won't support new types going forward into
the future.  From my perspective, a non-extensible type system is *not
sufficient* for VWRAP because it blocks the evolution of transported
elementary types.

And LLSD is actually worse than merely non-extensible, because it isn't
flexible either, especially in providing just a single integer type.  That's
not enough.

We need to design for tomorrow, not just for today.


Morgaine.



=================

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick <ohmeadhbh@gmail.com> wrote:

> but the question was... yes or no... do we want LLSD or DSD (it's
> successor) to be part of VWRAP moving forward?
>
> --
> meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
> @OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * OhMeadhbh@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We already know highly abstract data types that have all kinds of
> > extensibility, so there is no need to reinvent that much.
> >
> > We just need "best fit" for the documentation and basic usage of
> resources
> > as capabilities with LLIDL.
> >
> > Any further extensibility is specific to implementation, and that
> specific
> > implementation should be expected (as common mode with RFCs). What
> matters
> > is, can we use these data types to convey the concept? Yes, we have
> > demonstrated we can.
> >
> > Again, I worry less about that and more about the combine queries, which
> > would let you extend in many other ways besides mere serialization,
> > especially when pivotal data is known.
> >
> > Your argument only justifies further reason for me to move and update
> > SNOW-375 ( http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Dzonatas_Sol/SNOW-375 )
> to
> > the IETF wiki, especially if we expect STLP, which I rather forward-think
> > about, instead of private unencrypted URIs.
> >
> >
> > On 05/04/2011 07:02 AM, Morgaine wrote:
> >>
> >> Extensibility through XML is not extensibility of the types of the
> >> underlying ADT.
> >>
> >> The types of the ADT are expressed through 3 canonical serializations.
> >>  Those serializations merely reflect the types defined by the underlying
> >> ADT, and the XML serialization alone cannot extend the underlying ADT
> >> without breaking the mapping of the ADT to the other serializations.
> >>
> >> It's the type system itself that has to be extensible before you can
> >> validly use extended types in one of its serializations.
> >>
> >>
> >> Morgaine.
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > --- 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
> >
>