[ANSI-Smalltalk] Editing and executable specification

[Bruce Badger]

On 16/11/2007, Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini at lu.unisi.ch> wrote:
> I just had what I think is a great idea. :-)  Is DabbleDB suited for
> this?  Is there any DabbleDB expert that can work out the schema and so on?
>
> I hope that we can in some way export from DabbleDB to Smalltalk code so
> that the specification could be run by ANSI-compliant Smalltalks.  But I
> also hope using DabbleDB will give us a powerful environment to work in.

Right, this is the kind of thing I'd like to see us head towards over time.

I would prefer that there is a single managed body of work which can
be viewed/presented in a number of ways one of which is the "formal"
way for submission etc.  Your "two phase" approach makes me
uncomfortable since keeping track of the two distinct bodies of work
(i.e. the wiki and the "formal" text) would be a job in itself.

For now, until we have a better way, I suggest that we treat the text
in the wiki as the formal text.  We can have a separate page per
section of the final document or whatever, but I think we need a
single body of work that can keep changing over the course of many
releases of the standard.

However, I would be very keen to see us move to a better way of
managing the work, once such an option is something we can actually
use rather than be guinea pigs for.  What would be awful IMO is
derailing the work on the Smalltalk standard by turning this effort
into a project that was building a document management system (not
that anyone has said that, but that would be my fear).

-- 
Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills
http://www.openskills.org/