Eric: We could also consider names involving 'page' -
as the site/page metaphor has prevailed over the
card/stack metaphor: why fight the collective
unconsciousness?
Alain: Page is definitely more modern than Card.
Uli: I think the idea to use something similar to
HyperCard was that we wanted to create the successor
to HC, to carry on the torch.
Alain: Hear! Hear!
Uli: The intention was to show we haven't forgotten
our roots.
Alain: The Hyper portion of HC's name is unique to HC
while the Card portion has been used a lot. Besides,
we may not want to use the clunky Card metaphor, or
perhaps we may want to open it up to several
metaphors.
Eric: If Apple is really thinking of dumping HC (i
doubt it) ...
Alain: What makes you doubt this?
Eric: ... then maybe we can ask them to take it over
for them? They already tried spinning HC off to Claris
(unsuccesfully) and also tried to spin and sell of the
Newton before they just dropped it. Again, this could
be turned into a charitable write off for Apple if we
then license the program to schools.
Alain: And it fits in well with Apple's current Open
Source offerings. If they can't justify its
development in-house, then release it to the community
in order to benefit from the goodwill that will be
thus created. It's better than nothing and it cannot
hurt their bottom-line. Actually, if they ditch
HyperCard without releasing it to us, or continue to
stone-wall us indefinitely, then the consequences for
Apple of frustrating part of its user-base, while not
disastrous, cannot be good.
Eric: Personally, I doubt apple will dump HC but I
also am not expacting HC-III any time soon : so maybe
we can talk them into licensing/sharing source code
with us?
Alain: This has been tried twice before, without any
success. We got the silent-treatment instead. I do
believe, nonetheless, that we should keep on pursuing
it.
Uli: Until Apple have formally decided to drop HC
they'll never release the sources.
Alain: You're unfortunately right, Uli. But
maintenance without development is as close to death
as software can get. Perhaps we should precipitate the
death of HyperCard!!
Uli: Also, I'm not sure whether it would be desirable
to try to take a program that is written mostly in
Pascal and 68k assembly (and a little C, I think) into
a world of C++ fanatics. But I'm sure we could re-use
some of the sources when Apple finally decides what
they want to do with HC.
Alain: And we would have the secret file-format that
will insure that we will be able to use HC stacks
natively.
Uli: But at the current state of affairs this point
seems moot.
Alain: Here is the slogan that I propose :
Maintenance is death. Develop HyperCard or release it.
Eric: I have no problem sharing source code with end
users per se, but once we do it is no longer trade
secret and can be used by anyone commercially or
otherwise.
Alain: Unless our licence were to stipulate that
commercial development with OpenKard is restricted, as
GNU or GPL do (I think). Right Eric?
Uli: The original premise was that OpenCard was to be
open source. This will make it possible for other
programmers to contribute to OC and to help us in
tracking down bugs etc. like it happened with Linux. I
don't think we could ever work under trade secret. It
has to be open.
Alain: This is indeed one of the fundamental pillars
of our collaboration. You could even say that its
........ constitutional!
Eric: Also nu in french means naked, so i do not think
nuCard is such a good idea...
Alain: On the contrary, a name like that would
probably attract their attention, as evidenced by its
preponderance in advertising, eh! ;-)
Eric: VolksCard would also lead to confusion? I mean,
really, its neither a car, nor a political
nightmare...
Uli: I kinda like it. The original Volkswagen (known
as the Beetle in the US) was supposed to be the
affordable car for everyone. If that isn't a striking
similarity to HyperCard, I don't know what is.
Alain: I like it too, Uli.
Eric: It would be nice to integrate WWW with openKard
as much as possible...
Uli: Alain also has an interest in this, so I can
pretty much assure you this will be done.
Alain: You are right on the money, Uli.
Eric: I am writing a very primitive HTML editor using
HT
Alain: Several of them exist, including one that I
whipped together in a couple of days. It would have to
be substantially re-worked though because now we are
using HTML 4.
Eric: If it were possible to cross platforming the HC
externals that would be nice... Does MetaCard have any
insights on this?
Uli: Scott Raney (the "MetaCard guy") has told me
they'd be discussing this format on the xTalk list and
that means we'll have a say in how it'll be developed.
There will be collaboration on this, when the time is
right.
Alain: It doesn't seem likely to me. Externals that
make calls to the Mac Toolbox are surely impossible to
port, unless you re-code those parts of the toolbox
that you will need (I suppose).
Eric: Regarding TM - maybe we can talk metaCard into
paying the TM fee? This can be done via a contract
with not partnership.
Uli: I doubt it. MetaCard very likely has no interest
in funding us. They would like to get their UI laid
out, that's what the collaboration is for.
Alain: I have to agree with Uli even though the
argument that it would be in their best interest to
assist us financially is a valid one. How much would
MC have to invest to re-invent its GUI in-house?
Eric: ... partnership with metaCard? This could be
useful. In any event metaCard should know that our
efforts could constitute a charity, (i.e. free
distribution of openKard to schools) and thus would
permit them a charitable tax write off for incurred
expenses.
Alain: And corporations are always looking for
charitable stuff to donate to, in order to reduce
their tax burden, and to do some public relations too.
Eric: (if metaCard or Apple want details on the tax
aspects, please ask for I have an LLM in tax law...).
Alain: I am sure that they have their own lawyers. But
... hey! ... I might be interested. Are you familiar
with Quebec provincial taxes and/or Canada's federal
taxes?
Eric: That said, I would say our relationship with
metaCard should not be a partnership unless we
expressly enter into such relationship in writing -
which MC may not want to do anyway, so this could all
be moot.
Alain: Partnerships in writing. Anyone disagree?
Uli: I think we should leave out the MC engine of
this. MetaCard has nothing to do with OpenCard. It's
just a prototyping environment we may use to create
the editor and its User Interface. Forget about it for
this discussion.
Alain: You're probably right, Uli.
Uli: Also, the problem is determining what constitutes
a "reasonable amount of work" ???
Alain: This problem is definitely a sticky one.
Eric: Partners would have decision making authority:
they would have to agree unanimously before admitting
a new partner. All persons (associates and partners)
would have to agree to change the partnership
agreement. Partners would determine whether the
associate has done enough work.
Alain: That's how I see it too. But it doesn't solve
the problem though. It merely places the burden of
this hard determination on those members that are
designated as partners, so far. I am sure though that
we will work it out when the time comes.
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
