On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 23:35:05 -0400, Meng Weng Wong
<mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
| But that kind of fusion is ultimately okay. Maybe it'll
| taste good!
Folks who prefer picture to go along with their text may
like to see this slideshow:
OK, maybe it's a sign that I'm getting old and my eyes glaze over at
long docs and repeated acronyms, but that slideshow really helped (I
find it much easier to separate and keep track of items by colour,
shape and physical location than by opaque name, but then that is my
day-job: http://www.i2.co.uk ).
I like the idea of "SPF classic" forming part of a larger suite,
framework or approach which is loosely coupled enough that we can pick
and choose which bits we want to implement, but is coherent and
consistently arranged so as to minimise overlap, duplication and
possible conflicts between the parts.
If this overall suite is being branded with the SPF name, or the CID
name, or whatever, I don't mind as long as I can still implement the
SPF classic component in isolation without paying the costs associated
with other parts that I can't or don't want to use (and in this way,
it stands a better chance of persuading me to also dabble with adding
some of the other components later on). To go back to your fusion
cooking, you can start off by ordering something that's vaguely
familiar and relatively safe if slightly off-beat, but it encourages
you to be adventurous over time, rather than insisting you have a
vindaloo on your first visit.
And thanks for not using crappy clip-art, the dog in the t-shirt is cute.
Cheers
--
Tim