Xavier.....
I know you're frustrated. I have been excited about TAOO in Rev ever
since you first mentioned it, as you know. I have downloaded all the
pieces you've sent me. I've looked at them. I've cut them open and
probed their internals. I've read their code where I could. I've
edited docs where I could. You and I have exchanged dozens of emails
about it.
And I still don't completely get it.
Alex Tweedly said much the same thing. Your response was to point us
to the first line on your site as the "elevator pitch" for TAOO. Do
you mean this line?
"Modular Object Network Semantical Infeered Ergonomic User-friendly
Rapid Xtreme Development Or Trans-Contextual Organization Management.
In other words:
The Art Of Objects!"
If so, I can tell you that communicates nothing meaningful, at least
to me. It's a loosely coupled set of buzzwords.
COnsiderably farther down on your site -- in a location many people
probably never get to because they don't understand that top-level
message -- you have this: "The Art Of Objects is an environment to
navigate, find and edit information in the most flexible and reusable
way and for any computer program or object oriented application on
any platform." SO it doesn't sound like an OO framework for app
development. Rather, it sounds like an information-navigation utility
that would be quite suitable if one were building apps whose primary
raison d'etre were the navigation of large, complex, intertwingled
information spaces. And that's the impression I now have of TAOO. But
that's not what I thought you were talking about originally. And so
things are very confusing even for someone, like me, who has invested
dozens of hours in trying hard to grasp what you are doing.
I've asked you what kinds of apps TAOO is NOW suited to develop. What
I THINK I hear in response is that it's good at managing information
structures. So if I have an app that consists primarily of
information structures, TAOO might be a great tool. I don't have many
such applications. My apps are interactive experiences for the user,
with little data storage associated with them. At least the ones I'm
making these days. My sense, then, is that TAOO is (at least yet) not
a general-purpose object-oriented framework for the construction of
any kind of application I want to build. ANd if it is, how to get
started and what to do as I progress is just not clear.
So in answer to your wondering why "some lame projects get praise
while hard-work projects get none," it's about the buzz, about the
marketing, about the promotion. And that in turn requires two things:
Passion (which you clearly have) and really clear focus on what the
project is and what problem(s) it's intended to solve (which I think
you still struggle with, perhgaps, as Alex suggested, because it's
just so large and complex). But it's not even all that easy to get to
the basic stuff about TAOO on your site, Xavier.
If TAOO were a general-purpose object framework with a clearly
factored library of built-in objects with which one could begin to
construct any Rev application -- or even a major subset of Rev apps
-- and if it had a LOT of examples built that could be easily
disassembled to see how the TAOO componentry made them possible or
easier to create, I think it could in fact catch on.
WHere, for example, do your tool palettes fit in to TAOO? Were they
built using TAOO? They don't look like information space navigators.
IF they were built in TAOO, what specific aspects of TAOO made them
faster or easier to build than if I'd done them in pure Rev? Where's
the class library underneath them? If you want them to be examples of
the power of TAOO, you have to expose that power in a way that those
of us who are Rev coders with an object orientation can understand.
So far, you haven't been able to do that.
There is a vague sense of excitement about what you offer here. Your
passion is obvious. That you've developed this architecture across
many languages over the years is impressive. But at the end of the
day, a busy programmer cannot easily figure out what this beast is
and how it would help him or her develop powerful applications with
greater facility.
On Oct 14, 2005, at 4:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What i really dont get is why some lame
projects get praise while hard-work projects get none...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author
http://www.shafermedia.com
Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought"
From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html
_______________________________________________
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
