> Type checking was also a concern. I think they did not > understand that a data type (or xml tree) is not a guarantee > to have the system know about "semantics". They got > even more scared when I replied that the system should > best not be involved in semantics (which is up to the user).
UBF can have "contracts" that are verifiable. i agree about the semantics. i am still not sure why the network machinery in the middle would need to know what "volume 50" means if only the requester shell script and the noisemaker server need to understand it's meaning.
