# Re: Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]

Karen R. Sollins (sollins@lcs.mit.edu)
Thu, 29 Sep 1994 20:33:22 -0400

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Re: No "TOP" of the docuverse [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- Previous message: Nigel Edwards: "Re: No "TOP" of the docuverse [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- In reply to: Daniel W. Connolly: "Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"

    Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 20:33:22 -0400

    Message-Id: <199409300033.UAA02957@lysithea.lcs.mit.edu>

    From: "Karen R. Sollins" <sollins@lcs.mit.edu>

    To: connolly@hal.com

    In-Reply-To: <9409292012.AA05994@ulua.hal.com> (connolly@hal.com)

    Subject: Re: Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]

We use s-expressions right now. But there is an issue. One thing one
doesn't get from s-expressions is the ability to define in a
transmitted object an abstract type being transmitted (as opposed to
representation of types) without some sort of language for such
definitions. Now, one could use lisp, but I doubt that would go over
big in much of our potential customer base, if we said that in order
to play our game (URIs unlimited), among other things you need a lisp
interpreter.

This is not to say that the other syntax could solve the problem. I
am sympathetic to your s-expressioon position.

Karen

- Next message: Michael Mealling: "Re: No "TOP" of the docuverse [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- Previous message: Nigel Edwards: "Re: No "TOP" of the docuverse [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- In reply to: Daniel W. Connolly: "Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Lisp Syntax for external representation [Was: URC usage scenarios ]"