Showing papers on "Protocol (object-oriented programming) published in 1974"

A network graphics protocol

Abstract: One approach Is a celleotlon of "speolalopurpose protocols . " Each application prograr, l would publish descr ip t ion of t i le protocol needed to drive the program and to v iew ti le output (e.g, the UCSB system was 8o documented) . The prospect ive user would then write e program at his si te to Interpret the published protocol and to drive his display (probably making use of exist ing graphics programming faoll lt lee at Ills site). Thla might permit a convenient dlvlslon of labor between the computer execut ing the al)Pltcstlmt program and the computer driving the display (in pursuit of true resource sharing); It might be able to achieve very aw~,o,oth per formance despi te poor network reap.ease, etc. The d isadvantage of this approach Is that the user must write a new program to Inter face his dtsplay to each d i f ferent appl icat ion protocol. In addition, there Is no guarantee that the protocol required by the application prograr~ eae actua l ly be Implemented wlthln the user's o, perstklg sys tem and display hardware.

High level operations in automatic programming

Abstract: We discuss the thesis that one good way of achieving non-procedural or problem-oriented languages is by constructing higher and higher level procedural languages. We present a set of operations embedded in a programming language VERS2 which represent a higher level of description than currently exists. These include iterators (operations which, if written out, would normally involve an iteration over a group of objects), pattern matching facilities, implicitly specified data structures, and the ability to place constraints on data structures.

A Protocol Materials Evaluation: The Language of Children

Abstract: for interpreting new teaching experiences (4). The RFP further defined and described these protocol materials, and the project staff was not without experience in developing materials roughly similar to them. Cruickshank had done extensive work in creating simulation materials for teacher education while other members of the project group had been involved in various aspects of research in language development. This combination of experience led the group to propose a series of protocol materials to illustrate concepts of children’s oral language acquisition. (For a detailed discussion of protocol materials and the theoretical issues surrounding their development, see Cruickshank’s &dquo;The Protocol Materials Movement: An Exemplar of Efforts to Wed Theory and Practice in Teacher Education,&dquo; and Orlosky’s &dquo;The Protocol Materials Program&dquo; in this issue.) J

Questions on Getting Protocol Materials Into Users' Hands: Marketing Considerations: they market processes and software?

Abstract: Should protocol producers actually get into mass production and marketing, or should they market processes and software? Across the land there are protocol materials in various stages of readiness for utilization. Granted careful planning, production, field testing and revision, and mass production, there is the challenge of alerting the education community to the contents and availability of materials. A series of questions follows to illustrate the complexity of distribution problems facing protocol materials producers. The producers may or may not have expertise in marketing. If they do, they may have time constraints and other priorities. Now that materials are becoming increasingly available, marketing considerations