TUNES object interactivity

[Matthew Gruenke]

>Dear Matt,
>   you description of your wished OS seems perfectly in phase with the TUNES
>project: fine-grained objects that users combine at will to obtain a custom
>system adapted to their needs and resources.

  Cool.  Resonance is being attained (I hope).


>   Actually, this is precisely what the Interfaces project is all about:
>the HLL project defines objects with clean, well-known semantics. But whenever
>there is no precise well-defined semantics for an object, it is defined with
>annotations describing what we know about the object, and external heuristics

  Why not require objects to be able to report information about themselves, 
upon request?

  Are all objects required to be written in either HLL (and/or) LLL?  Are these
then compiled when the code portion is to be run?

  Might objects be required to be able to create a copy of themselves, in their
packed up, distributable format, with their settings set to default?

  What did you think about my comment that all commands in an application, that
are available to a user via an interface, be available to another object?  This
seems to me like a requirement for the interface, alone, if flexibility is to be
maximized.  The added benifit of being able to write "super-apps" also seems
quite nice.

                                                :Matt Gruenke