On Feb 4, 3:42 pm, John Barstow <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Turner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ah, ok. So the transformer doesn't transform op streams from different
> > clients so much as it transforms op streams from different versions.
> > Is that it?
>
> That's right. From the server side it's [ops the client doesn't know
> about] x [ops the client wants me to apply]
> The version number just tells us which ops the client doesn't know
> about yet (all the newer versions).
>
> From the client side, it's [ops I haven't sent the server yet] x [ops
> the server just sent me]
>
> > And the transformer operates pairwise? So, if there's a stream with
> > more ops than the other stream, the unmatched ops go through
> > unchanged, correct? And if there's a disparity of more than one
> > between the version numbers, the transformer will need to be called
> > several times on successive pairs, right? So, for instance, to bump a
> > client whose last known version is v6 to v8, the server would call (v6
> > x v7) x v8. Do I have that right?
>
> > In the example above, A1' = A1 X B1, B1' = B1 X A1, and so forth,
> > right?
>
> Well, not quite. Here I think you need to look at the code to get a
> clearer picture, but I'll illustrate in a slightly different way.
>
> Let's look at the following transform:
>
> [A1, A2, A3] x [B1, B2] = [A1', A2', A3'], [B1', B2']
>
> What we end up with is two sets of operations.
>
> [A1, A2, A3] + [B1', B2'] <-- Apply the A operations first
> [B1, B2] + [A1', A2', A3'] <-- Apply the B operations first
>
> (where a + indicates concatenation)
>
> This implies that transform could be imagined as a sort of matrix
> multiplication.
>
> A1' = (A1 x B1) x B2  <--- where we just keep the A result of each transform
> A2' = (A2 x B1) x B2
> A3' = (A3 x B1) x B2
>
> B1' = ((B1 x A1) x A2) x A3 <-- where we just keep the B result of
> each transform
> B2' = ((B2 x A1) x A2) x A3
>
> What the transform is doing is asking the question, "What do the A
> operations look like if the B operations were already applied?" This
> is how you get convergence.
>
> > So, for instance, to bump a
> > client whose last known version is v6 to v8, the server would call (v6
> > x v7) x v8. Do I have that right?
>
> The difference in version numbers just tells the server which
> operations need to be applied to the incoming client operations.
>
> So if the server is at v8 and the client is at v6, the transform is:
>
> ([v7] + [v8]) x [client delta] = [results to send client], [v9]
>
> More concretely, if:
>
> v7 = [A1,A2]
> v8 = [A3]
> client delta = [B1, b...@v6
>
> Then:
> [A1, A2, A3] x [B1, B2] = [A1', A2', A3'], [B1', B2']
>
> v9 = [B1', B2']  <-- the A operations were applied first by the server
> [results to send client] = [A1', A2', A3']...@v9 <-- the B operations
> were applied first by the client
>
> Does that make it clearer?

Yes, much clearer, thank you. The point about each operation being
composed with each operation of the other stream was a key point. I
was wondering how one could apply the transformed operations to a
client that already had applied the operations that you were
transforming with; now I get it.

So then is it a property of the operations and the transform function
that ((A x B1) x B2) x B3 == A x (B1 x B2 x B3)? I haven't bothered to
work out a formal proof for such an equivalence, but it would seem to
follow from your above explanation.


I have a couple of other unrelated questions that I would love if you
(or anyone else) could answer for me.

1) The whitepaper mentions "anti-elements". What are those?

2) The image depicting "positions" in the whitepaper apparently treats
elements (tags) as single entities--i.e., taking up only one position,
like a character. Why is a tag not simply a specific application of
the "insert characters" operation?

Thank you once again for all your help.

Turner

-- 
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