Software requirements: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (:Text is the default still
) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*[[audio]] vs. [[video]] as primary presentation of [[Consumerium buying signal]] | *[[audio]] vs. [[video]] as primary presentation of [[Consumerium buying signal]] | ||
:Text is the default still | |||
*[[Python]] vs. [[Java]] - consider [[mobile device]] and [[wiki code]] issues | *[[Python]] vs. [[Java]] - consider [[mobile device]] and [[wiki code]] issues | ||
*[[response time]] - is [[HTTP]] an acceptable protocol for our purposes? If not, can some similar [[REST]] protocol be developed that will be? | *[[response time]] - is [[HTTP]] an acceptable protocol for our purposes? If not, can some similar [[REST]] protocol be developed that will be? | ||
*[[PHP]] - useful tool or slow script-kiddie fluff? | *[[PHP]] - useful tool or slow script-kiddie fluff? | ||
Revision as of 12:32, 10 March 2004
Software requirements are so constrained by hardware requirements, protocol requirements and (especially) performance requirements that we should avoid choosing any programming language, production wiki code or even chat code until the whole healthy buying infrastructure is much better understood. This starts by understanding the healthy signal infrastructure and its low tolerance for e-waste or volunteer labour.
Some questions to keep in mind as these concepts evolve:
- audio vs. video as primary presentation of Consumerium buying signal
- Text is the default still
- Python vs. Java - consider mobile device and wiki code issues
- response time - is HTTP an acceptable protocol for our purposes? If not, can some similar REST protocol be developed that will be?
- PHP - useful tool or slow script-kiddie fluff?