Am 29.11.2007 um 19:39 schrieb Reed Hedges:
Component does imply that it could be provided by a plugin module, and
is dynamic, both of which are attributes of MetaObjects.
I'm still not convinced that Component is a good replacement term.
When I hear Component I usually think of something
Posted at: http://interreality.org/phorum/read.php?2,118,129#msg-129
reed wrote:
KAO Wrote:
runtime. All in all, I think they deserve their
own name, and
Component just isn't it.
Maybe we could go the way of VObjects and call them VComponents, though that is
a bit cumbersome-- they're all
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 01:33:22PM +0100, Karsten Otto wrote:
Also metaobject is
an existing term of art in the programming language community
having to
do with defining and manipulating the semantics of how programming
language objects are invoked, and while this is something that
Component is generic, and also recalls COM etc.
How about:
Part
Facet
Role
Type
Fragment
Trait
What exactly *is* a metaobject? It's a constituent Vobject that's part of a
real Vobject, and which implements a facet or part of that Vobject, probably
corresponding to a type. It implements part
Part is even more generic/vague than component, I think. Subparts
might be slightly better. Another way to look at it, which would be
clearest:
vobject-getParts();
vobject-getSubparts();
vobject-getFacets();
vobject-getRoles();
vobject-getTypes(); // very bad, the term type is already
Also spracht Peter Amstutz (Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:53:17 -0500):
The most common use of term component is probably in the context of
COM, XPCOM, KParts and so forth type of systems where it simply implies
loosely-coupled objects, with separatation of interface and
implementation and often
