ISSUE-60: Example of tight coupling in MMI architecture
Example of tight coupling in MMI architecture
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- MMI Architecture
- Raised by:
- James Barnett
- Opened on:
- 2008-02-11
- Description:
- We should provide an informative example of how the MMI architecture can be used to implement a tight coupling of two components. For example, we can create a simple one-state SCXML state machine with event handlers that forward events between the two components. If the components are co-located with the SCXML interpreter, this would be highly efficient and the practical equivalent of direct communication.
- Related Actions Items:
ACTION-123 on Raj Tumuluri to Prepare some text on tight coupling to go in App. G (ISSUE-60) on Sep. 13 - due 2010-12-15, closed- Related emails:
- [all] MMI minutes - 10 January 2011 (from ashimura@w3.org on 2011-01-11)
- [all] mmi minutes November 15, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-11-15)
- [all] f2f agenda (from ashimura@w3.org on 2010-11-01)
- [all] MMI agenda for October 25, 2010 and draft agenda for Lyon f2f (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-10-25)
- Re: [all] Issue-50 updated document (from raj@openstream.com on 2010-10-11)
- Re: [all] ISSUE 4 - language (from raj@openstream.com on 2010-10-11)
- [all] MMI agenda October 11, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-10-08)
- [all] MMI agendas September 27-October 11, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-09-24)
- RE: [all] MMI agenda for Monday, September 20 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-09-17)
- Re: [all] MMI agenda for Monday, September 20 (from raj@openstream.com on 2010-09-17)
- [all] MMI agenda for Monday, September 20 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-09-17)
- [all] MMI minutes September 13, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-09-17)
- [all] MMI agendas September 13-20, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-09-10)
- [all] agenda MMI call August 30-September 20, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-08-27)
- [all] MMI agendas August 23-September 20, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-08-20)
- [all] MMI agendas August 16-September 20, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-08-12)
- [all] MMI agenda August 9, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-08-06)
- [all] reminder, no call August 2, agendas for August 9-September 20 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-31)
- [all] MMI agenda July 26, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-23)
- MMI call cancelled (was RE: [all] MMI agenda July 19, 2010) (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-19)
- [all] MMI agenda July 19, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-18)
- [all] agenda MMI call July 12, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-09)
- [all] reminder, no call July 5, agendas July 12-September 20, 2010 (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-07-02)
- [all] MMI agenda June 28, 2010 (from ashimura@w3.org on 2010-06-28)
- [all] reminder, no MMI call today and list of dates for presentations (from dahl@conversational-technologies.com on 2010-06-21)
- ISSUE-60: Example of tight coupling in MMI architecture [MMI Architecture] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2008-02-11)
Related notes:
from f2f We should insert a paragraph into the Architecture document explaining the idea of a super IM and a "sub IM" and how the super IM can only send messages to the "sub IM", which may route them further to internal "MC's". We should give examples, e.g. talking head. This is especially effective if the GUI and TTS modalities are colocated and the sub IM intercepts events from the GUI or TTS and routes them appropriately without those events going to the super IM. (see picture from f2f) Actually there doesn't even need to be a "sub IM". There may need to be some thought given to the exact wording.
Deborah Dahl, 4 Mar 2008, 16:26:23Display change log
