On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Brian May <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 07:53:42PM +1000, Dan Peterson wrote:
> > We're continuing to work to open up a server-to-server federation port on
> > WaveSandbox <http://wavesandbox.com/>.co
> > <http://wavesandbox.com/>m<http://wavesandbox.com/>,
> > but, due to production pressures related to our recent preview release,
> we
> > are now planning to enable it towards the end of October. We've also been
> > working to provide more documentation around the wave model, and so we've
> > produced a draft specification for the wave conversation model: <LINK>
>
> Thank you for the update.
>
> Please don't rush your efforts, I would much prefer the right solution as
> opposed to the rushed solution. I think others would agree with me here.
>
> > Getting deeper into the details:
> >
> >
> > As a number of you in this forum have already noted, we've added support
> for
> > agents to FedOne. Agents are the underlying infrastructure for robots as
> in
> > the Google Wave APIs (
> > http://code.google.com/apis/wave/extensions/robots/index.html). The
> first
> > agent we created was "Echoey" which proved useful for debugging
> federation.
> > As the name implies that whenever added to a wave will echo a response.
> > Check it out at:
> >
> http://code.google.com/p/wave-protocol/source/browse/src/org/waveprotocol/wave/examples/fedone/agents/echo/Echo.java
>
> Interesting, I have wondered where robots fit into the system. So I guess
> it
> would look something like
>
>                  robot
>                  robot library
> server            agent library
> C/S protocol <--> C/S protocol
>
> If my ASCII art makes sense to anyone other then myself ;-)
>
> There might be same layers between robot and robot library I am still not
> clear
> on.
>

Slide 17 of this presentation shows the relationship between agents and
robots:

  http://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dggjrx3s_110fkt37dgb

   Thanks,
   -joe


>
> > This means that we will not have 100% uptime, and will
> > likely still contain bugs.
>
> In Office Hours 2009-09-09, Brian Kennish said:
> "To misquote Lars, we decided not to have any security or privacy
> problems."
>
> If you decided not to have security or privacy problems, how come you
> decided
> to have bugs? Wasn't this a bad decision? ;-)
>
> > The draft Google Wave Conversation Model specification mentioned above
> goes
> > into significant detail about the XML-like format of documents stored in
> > wavelets. You will note that the FedOne client does not use the document
> > schema as published above. We expect the FedOne client to only provide
> > limited support for the new document schema initially. Nonetheless, we
> > encourage you to inspect it as this is where we are heading.
>
> What implications does this have when using the FedOne client to display
> a full-featured wave created with the sandbox?
> --
> Brian May <[email protected]>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave 
Protocol" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to