Sun Jan 20 13:31:02 2002
From: Kevin Holmes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Mox
Brian P Templeton email@example.com wrote:
> environment in other languages, except that instead of being a
> mapping between symbols and objects, it is simply a collection of
> objects, internally identified by a tumbler (a word borrowed from
> Xanadu) - though I may change `tumbler' to something else, since I
> don't really know what would be like in Xanadu other than being of
> the form 0.x.y.z (I could probably do some research on it, though).
Can you provide a link or explanation on what a tumbler is?
> In MOX, source code is merely a sequence of arrows, possibly, e.g.
> using the Lisp tradition of using lists to represent function
> applications. However, there are *no symbols*. It will likely be
> possible to attach a default label to an object, through hints, but
> there is no particular reason why one must use labeled objects at all.
> In fact, using hints, someone could implement, say, a system where
> objects were identified by color (yes, that's probably a really stupid
> idea, but there are most likely some interesting variations on it).
Can you give more examples on how to reference an object without a symbol?
> - Synopsis - MOX is based on a datastructure called an arrow (in
> honor of Brian Rice's excellent Arrow system, which it seems that no
> one other than he understands :)). Source is just a sequence of
> arrows ``pointing'' to an object in a 'verse, which can orthogonally
> or non-orthogonally make objects persistant, and [FIXME: is this a
> good idea? - probably not] the same arrow will always point to the
> same object, unless, perhaps, a hint is provided to the contrary. A
> 'verse is a collection of objects. There are no symbols in MOX,
> though they can be emulated. MOX combines development and hypertext
> in a somewhat novel way.
Could you explain what a hint is and how it would be used? And how is