[Pipet Devel] Peep update

[Brad Chapman]

Deanne wrote:
> 1) Accept input from peep thru CORBA. This input will be (loosely), 
"User
> wants [xxx] node in [yyy] position" where "xxx" includes type of 
node and
> name of node, and "yyy" includes network-order and URI of node.

    Well, I think it is even simpler than that right now. All you 
should need to do is present a list of the "types" of nodes available 
(which you can get from the DL through the CORBA interface). Then the 
user will choose a type, and the DL makes it for 'em. 
    URIs and remote nodes and all of that stuff are for the future, 
and the location of remote nodes should probably be semi-transparent 
to the user interface, since the DL will end up handling most of that.
    So, for at least right now all you need is xxx = node name, and we 
can forget aobut the yyy :-).

Deanne wrote:
> 3) Take regurgitated DL information and arrange it in a neat, 
referential,
> and tidy way so users can easily manipulate it at the UI. 

Jeff wrote:
> Yep.  You'll largely be stripping off the XML tags.

This is not really true since there are no XML tags. The DL talks with 
the user interface exclusively through CORBA now, so there is no need 
to be giving the user interface XML, when it can just give it 
functions to call. Have you had a chance to look at the "How to Write 
a UI for Piper" thingy? Are you opposed to what I'm doing with the 
UIL/DL interface?

Deanne wrote:
> 1) Dynamic and Transparent. Peep would automagically execute an 
update to
> the DL every time a user defines a pnode, etc. This is nice for 
run-time
> tweaks, I guess. It's dynamic because it automatically updates. It's
> transparent because it gives the DL the job of handling the 
structure of
> the network...in this case, the UI is "transparent" to the DL, and is
> simply acting as a real-time  information broker to the DL during 
its use.
> Pros: Dynamic updating to the DL.
> Cons: All the work is done by the DL, the UI is just the interface 
to the
> DL. Therefore, the DL will have to notice when shite does not make 
sense.

Yeah, this is the right way, even tho it means more work for me :-). 

> Yes, no, thoughts?

That's all the way I'm thinking about it. Congrats on managing to get 
up to speed so fast, it took me forever to figure out what was going 
on...

Brad