-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/16/09 9:50 AM, Brian Cully wrote: > On 16-Sep-2009, at 10:36, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> For the latter point I bring the following hypotheses to the table: >>> >>> Every time somebody wants to start using pubsub collections (as it is >>> currently defined), they really want to implement nodes-as-code. >> >> Has anyone ever written up the node-as-code concept? I think that would >> be quite helpful. > > Agreed. The only reason I champion collection nodes as I do is that > I don't know what "node as code" means. It might be better, but in the > mean time the only solution I have is collection nodes.
Ralph? ;-) >>> For me, it appears that static configuration of collections is painful, >>> and services that want to provide nodes that aggregate other nodes have >>> implicit rules for determining where stuff should go. So in spirit that >>> would be kinda the same as collections, but without the additional >>> protocol and DAG theory. >> >> Exactly. Simpler is better, if we can make it work. We must remember >> that not everything needs to be defined in protocol... > > I've always thought the DAG theory section of the XEP shouldn't be > there. The concept of collection nodes is relatively simple to anyone > used to hierarchies. The only added twist is many-to-many nodes, but > even that isn't particularly hard IMHO. Most rails-y web frameworks have > such a concept now, as do almost all ORMs. There's no need to confuse > people by letting them know there's math behind it. > > I do like collection nodes because they are very generic and thus > allow many different configurations and uses. And while I don't think we > need to be pointing out "MATH HERE" in the XEP, it is a bonus that DAGs > are well studied and understood, allowing the motivated engineer to do > fancy math things with them. We could move the DAG stuff to an appendix. It was mostly just a learning exercise on my part anyway... Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkqxIbUACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzKzwCfU2azPMFfW7XIaaMvMEBQrch1 ++IAoM+px2L44j0qloVV/t+9Flu+PEXb =v0fh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
