That is becuase waves are thought of as the conversation model. A wavelet is thought of a conversation or a branch of a conversation. This is where this obscure terminology has got us.
But really you could have any conversation model with a wave like service. I don't see that the be an en all of wave future, but something that would be commonly needed. But yes I agree, you can't have everything in wavelets. That was one of the problems before, there is a flaw in trying to use wavelets to explain wave. I don't see WIAB for novice end users. It is a stop gap to get technical people using it, and coming up with ideas, and running experimental services. -- 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.
