Okay, looked at your site now...

David Vennik soma@dynamite.com.au
Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:12:13 +1100

Hello again.

It's amaaazing what a bit of sleep can do for one... I realised theat there 
was a major lack in my ideas. You can't have a lego model of 
interconnectivity without a set of standard plugs.

Which is another way of saying that I need to sit down and think about 
everything that a person needs a computer to do, break it all down until I 
have only the essential differences between all the neccesary processes, 
and then more or less make a dictionary which all programs follow.

That's probably the key to my ideas... What I wanted was more than anything 
a way to connect lots of little units that could do things with each other 
with the possibility of switching parts according to taste or neccessity. 
This is the general gist I got from Fare's writings on Interface, what was 
needed in order to solve that problem. And other than express that in a 
number of funny ways, I didn't really go into what I was talking about.

But to repeat myself, what is needed is a language, a standardised lexicon 
describing all the things a computer needs to do, in the most general form 
possible so as to allow communication through a generalised interface into 
more specialised ports of communication.

Well, it may seem like something which takes a lot of fun out of 
programming, but like in real life, we can't do anything if we can't 
communicate properly. What this has meant for most computer systems, has 
been that basically they are alien to each other, that for example the 
average communication protocol could not just connect with another systems 
network interface software. There would need to be a translator in between. 
But if there were a language by which computers communicated, there would 
be no translator.

What do y'all think of that? Is there some merit in this idea?

There's somethin' downright weird goin' on around here...