Re: self describing MOF?



Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Alexander Rupsch (Alexander.Rupsch@gmx.de)
Date: Wed 21 Apr 2004 - 10:24:35 BST


Laurence Tratt wrote:

> One thing to bear in mind is that in the upcoming 2.0 standards,
> political fudgery has split MOF into EMOF and CMOF which further muddies
> already murky waters. 

Can you explain why that is so?

[long explanation, thanks]

OK, if MOF is relaying on some concepts which are not expressible by 
itself the world becomes a bit clearer to me ;-). well, it was at least 
a theoretical question. By implementing MOF one uses the capabilities of 
the programming language of choice -> external constructs.

regards.
-- 
Alexander Rupsch
http://www.dreinhalb.de

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view