General agreement with Alex except on his restriction and added need below.
At 16:41 09/06/2005, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On Wed, 2005/06/08 (MDT), <ho(_at_)alum(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu> wrote:
I'm going to give the rules language a shot by trying to author
a draft that merges the best of P and Sieve. Simple semantics
and rich matching,
Will you extend Sieve? In other words, will your language be a
Sieve extenstion, following Sieve extension requirements?
Will you make your language specific to HTTP adaptations?
Or will it have modules/libraries/extensions/whatever for
each application protocol being adapted (HTTP, SMTP, etc.)?
with control points tailored to the OPES architecture.
Do you mean points where adaptation is triggered? For
example pre/post-cache and request/response path in
caching HTTP proxies? If not, please ignore the paragraph
below.
In my limited experience with ICAP configurations, and based
on the "application agnostic core" principle, there may be
no need for explicit control points. The control point can
(should?) be an external to the language matter. The language
does not have to depend on the message processing "point"
where the adaptation is triggered. And IIRC, OPES architecture
only provides examples of possible control points.
Some difficulty to understand how you trigger the adaptation then?
Or we do not speak of the same thing?
Send your wish lists.
My wish list can be easily derived from the Sieve versus P
comparison I have posted some time ago. I want all the good
features that made the basis for that comparison :-).
Idem.
Due to the interest of this I would like to use the language to see how to
amalgamate it in a Context Reference Center command system. This means that
I will replace every word of the language by a numeric value permitting to
translate it in any language. The call out server will be a CRC permiting
to call on common contextual references to document or translate the
content of a text/page/mail.
So, I am interested that nothing in the language depends on the
value/structure of the used terms.
I currently use a moke-up in ASCII using Perl like variable. FYI the intent
is to document the solution for second week of August to support a language
description ISO (ISO 639-4) standard proposition. Thank you for your help.
jfc