Hi Marius, what i wrote in the last mail is my personal usage of notions up till now (because i was asked). I don't think that it's the way to go.
The meta term for me is "object", as said before. gr~~~ Am 13.09.2007 um 16:51 schrieb marius schebella: > Thomas Grill wrote: >> For abstractions, the word is "abstraction". An abstraction in >> turn contains objects that may be of type "message", "sub patch", >> "abstraction" or "external/binary object". >> I always use "external object" to mean an object that can't be >> opened as a patch. > > for pdpedia I would like to have the same page layout for external > objects and abstractions. I am talking about standardized > abstractions like the pdmtl abstractions. I refer to the pd > fileformat, that lists abstractions as "obj". I therefore tend to > call abstraction also "objects". > a message in my opinion is no object. I think also a sub patch is > not a real object, although it is created in an object box. (if you > open the pd file with a text editor, you will not find the word > "obj", it is a canvas, which is also not an object for me, I am not > sure about atomboxes (numbers and symbols). but also arrays and > comments are no objects in that sense. > otherwise, please can someone find a meta term for "everything that > can be created inside an objectbox (ctrl-1)". > marius. > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
