Re: terminology challenge

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>]

>>>>> Andy Bierman writes:

Andy> I've noticed that not all of us are using the same terminology
Andy> to talk about SMI concepts (not again!).  We have a real
Andy> challenge here, because MIBs are used by three distinct
Andy> communities:

[...]

Andy> We need to figure out a coherent terminology (and syntax BTW)
Andy> which is user-friendly to all three communities.

I think it is of key importance to use terms that are widely used and
understood. And if we support modeling beyond what is available in C,
we better use terms from C++ or Java rather than inventing our own
terminology. BTW, even Perl claims to support OO programming these
days (although the Perl OO system is rather perlish).

/js