Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Also, that term 'everyone' is worth studying. The fact of homophily means that communication which is effective tends toward locality (all politics are local). In an ecology of games, one studies memberships in multiple communities of discourse. This intersection of actors/games/subissues will determine the order of events in time to resolve an issue. In other words, not everyone, but some n of some where the value of n is dynamic over time. What you are tending toward in this topic are the rules of dynamic networks. Google 'Revisiting Norton Long's Ecology of Games: A Network Approach'. len From: Roger L. Costello [mailto:costello@m...] >I assume that this question has as its impetus ... Here's my motivation for the question: in a large, complex Enterprise you may know the kinds of "things" that need to be moved around (e.g., Book, BookCover, etc) but you don't have a-priori knowledge of the specific transactions that will be needed. So, is it feasible to simply declare a bunch of components (that everyone understands), which may be dynamically assembled by one system and shipped to another system where the assembly is dynamically understood. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
|
