Michael Stone wrote: > Consequently, I want to make using activities more like web pages. That's why > I > work on rainbow and on networking design. ... > In my opinion, ideally, they click a URL and the software they > clicked runs most of the time. They don't care what version is underneath. If > they want to change it, they hit view source and edit. If they want to share > it, they share the URL, however they like.
Thank you for this perspective. I think this is a very helpful way to think about our software behavior goals, especially if we imagine our URLs as being a bit content-addressable. > Lastly, about the idea of shipping everything in Python, or Java, or > Smalltalk: > > Give up -- this works for mobile phones, not for "things to think with"! > > Programming languages are prime examples of "things to think with". We're > trying to provide people with lots of these, and with the best ones that we > can > find, remember? Hmm... but surely web pages are the prime example of a medium that contains an extremely limited variety of languages? I have come to accept that we should "provide people with lots of" languages, but I think we can, and should, choose our interpreters to retain independence of platform, and isolation from distro issues. Even x86 assembler can be such a language, given an appropriate interpreter [1]. For a particularly strange glimpse into the future: http://www.codebase.es/jsgb/ [1] http://www.qemu.org/qemu-doc.html#SEC69
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep