[snipped lots of wild yet very interesting thoughts]
If I understood correctly, your stream of thought was something on the
line of:
1) Unix uses pipelines, Cocoon uses pipelines.
2) Unix has interactive shells to compose those pipelines (or the
ability to run scripts for those shells), why shoulnd't cocoon have the
same concept?
I see a number of dangerous assumptions in your logic, please, don't
consider it a critic, but just a review out of my head.
1) I've heard talking about Cocoon as a 'XML pipeline engine'... now you
are proposing to call it an "web operating system"... the first is too
little, the second is too much.
2) an interactive shell isn't really different from what Ovidiu is
working on (even connecting Emacs directly to the scheme sitemap engine)
and I agree that it might be a good parallel to show that he might be
going in the right direction
3) a shell *DOES* *NOT* solve the 'data inward' asymmetry that cocoon
appears to exhibit. It is a development tool. Possibly a way to author
the sitemap, but I see *MANY* better solutions.
Doing parallels is good, but using parallelism as a design suggestion
without considering the weak sides is, IMO, even more dangerous.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
