We'll see. Maybe XML can evolve into *IT*.
> I'm not going to go into it here. I'm writing it up in a position
> paper for the OOPSLA Business Object Design and Implementation Workshop.
> ( http://www.tiac.net/users/jsuth/oopsla97 )
> >Looks like we'll need a judge's ruling... survey says...
> Bah! How is that pronounced?
Like the XXX on Family Feud.
> >I'm sorry, your answer is incomplete, but we have some
> >lovely parting gifts for you...
> <sigh> So much for simplicity. 8-/
> Ok, how about this...
> Routing becomes just another problem domain on top of a physical
> substrate. The packet navigates the graph based on meta data maintained
> at the nodes. I say nodes because they're no longer routers. Routers
> route, but nodes are "places", complete with context (ie. a local
> document containing information about where particular packets are
> required). The packets do the routing based on this context.
The key problem then is building routing solutions INTO the physical
substrate. Can it be done? Munchkins say yes.
> Aren't active networks snubbing their noses at OSI (just asking, I'm
> not entirely sure)? Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Yes, and that's the point: the OSI model may have taken us just about as
far as we can go. Time for a new sheriff.
> >Oh wait, we have that already... it's called kudos...
> What's the exchange rate on a kudo?
More than I can presently afford. I'm running such a tremendous kudo
deficit, I'm gonna get arrested for impersonating the government.
> >While such applications still lie over the horizon, it is obvious that
> >they will play an increasingly important role in our lives and that
> >their implementation will require XML-like data in order to function
> >interoperably and thereby allow intelligent Web agents to compete
> >effectively in an open market.
> > -- Jon Bosak, Sun Microsystems
> :s/XML-like data/meta data/g
Ah, now if we could just agree that XML gives you metadata
functionality, we'd all be aligned...
Can't we all just get along?
-- Rodney King