you definitely are on the same wave! May i put this into the wiki? Anyone with an interest deserves a voice in it i think... You have, again, hit the nail on the head!
_____ From: Dennis Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 6:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Approach to explaining TAOO [was ANN: New Website for TAOO] Xavier, If I truly have got "it" then I can suggest an approach to explaining "it" It seems to me that the problem is that you have spent 15 years building a "do everything I want" program. When you try and explain it, you end up trying to explain "everything you have wanted" for the last 15 years. This is next to an impossible task without writing a book! However, all is not lost. You just need to take us back 15 steps from a technical development point of view. TAOO is built on a conceptually simple idea that supports the basic capability to add functionality. Instead of telling us all about the wonderful functionality you have built on "it", tell us what "it" is and how we could use "it" to build our own functionality from the humble beginnings. Then later tell us about just one at a time of the wonderful things you have added to "it" to solve a problem. Most important is don't explain anything using terms that are used for OOP or any other buzzword rich religion. Explain from simple concepts in normal simple terms that have universal understanding. At the most primitive level, you are "supporting" a way of defining a named script, or a named object with a script. You also have a dictionary of the things that have been defined to make it easy to find and specify the use of these things. We all understand how the things in the last paragraph are defined and used in Rev. How are they different in "it"? I am not trying to explain TAOO here. I am trying to explain how you can explain to me and others in a way that can be grasped --one easy step at a time. Don't explain too much at once. Just start with the most primitive concept that makes it possible to build on. If you start this way, and even create a very simple version of "it" with almost no added capability for others to try out and explore, I am sure you will get a lot of useful feedback and helpful participation that you are looking for. Dennis On Oct 17, 2005, at 1:12 AM, MisterX wrote: you got it! It's not forth programming with stacks though! The "name" = object stuff was cleverly left out! cheers Xavier _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution