[Gzz-commits] manuscripts/storm article.rst

[Benja Fallenstein]

CVSROOT:        /cvsroot/gzz
Module name:    manuscripts
Changes by:     Benja Fallenstein <address@hidden>      03/02/09 04:40:51

Modified files:
        storm          : article.rst 

Log message:
        Small fixes/polishing

CVSWeb URLs:
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/gzz/manuscripts/storm/article.rst.diff?tr1=1.121&tr2=1.122&r1=text&r2=text

Patches:
Index: manuscripts/storm/article.rst
diff -u manuscripts/storm/article.rst:1.121 manuscripts/storm/article.rst:1.122
--- manuscripts/storm/article.rst:1.121 Sun Feb  9 03:49:00 2003
+++ manuscripts/storm/article.rst       Sun Feb  9 04:40:51 2003
@@ -40,18 +40,18 @@
 [ref chord, can, tapestry, pastry, kademlia, symphony, viceroy,
 skip graph, swan] allow location-independent identifiers
 to be resolved on a global scale. 
-It is now feasible to do a global search for all information
+It is now feasible to do a global search to find all information
 about a given identifier, on any peer in the network.
 This, we believe, may be the most important result of peer-to-peer 
 research with regard to hypermedia.
 
 We examine how location-independent identifiers can support *data mobility*.
 In today's computing world, documents move quite freely between 
-computers: being sent as e-mail attachments, carried around on disks,
+computers: they are sent as e-mail attachments, carried around on disks,
 published on the web, moved between desktop and laptop systems,
 downloaded for off-line reading or copied between computers in a LAN. 
 We use 'data mobility' as a collective term for the movement of documents
-between computers (or locations on one computer, such as folders),
+between computers (or folders!),
 and movement of content between documents (through copy&paste) [#]_.
 
 .. [#] While the physical mobility of e.g. notebooks may effect
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
 .. [#] It might be more appropriate to speak about *resources*
    and *references* instead of *documents* and *links*, but
    in the spirit of [ref kappe95scalable], we stick with
-   the latter terms for explanation purposes.
+   the simpler terms for explanation purposes.
 
 *Dangling links* are an issue when documents are moved
 between servers; when no network connection is available,
@@ -85,13 +85,13 @@
 
 Advanced hypermedia systems such as Microcosm and Hyper-G
 address dangling links through a notification system [ref]:
-When a document is moved, servers storing links to it are notified.
+When a document is moved, a message is sent to servers storing links to it.
 Hyper-G uses an efficient protocol for delivering such notifications
 on the public Internet. 
 
 Location-independent identifiers for documents 
-make such notification unnecessary; a peer-to-peer lookup system 
-can resolve documents whereever they are moved.
+make such a system unnecessary; a peer-to-peer lookup system 
+can find documents whereever they are moved.
 Such a system also works for data not publicized on the Internet.
 For example, if one email has a document attached to it, and another email
 links to this document, an index of locally stored documents
@@ -190,9 +190,11 @@
 
 The dangling link problem has received a lot of attention
 in hypermedia research [refs]. As examples, we examine the ways
-in which HTTP, Microcosm [ref], Hyper-G [ref] and URNs [ref]
+in which HTTP, Microcosm [ref] and Hyper-G [ref] 
 deal with the problem.
 
+.. XXX and URNs [ref]
+
 In HTTP, servers are able to notify a client that a document
 has been moved, and redirect it accordingly [ref spec?]. However,
 this is not required, and there are no facilities for
@@ -208,8 +210,9 @@
 to the filters. Linkbases implemented as filters can
 update their links accordingly. A client selects a set
 of remote filters to use. Only links stored by one
-of these filters can be found.
-[HymEbook?]
+of these filters can be found by the client.
+
+.. [HymEbook?]
 
 .. Microcosm systems can independently choose 
    whether to import filters from other systems, and whether
@@ -218,15 +221,15 @@
    for example in a workgroup.
 
 In Hyper-G, documents are bound to servers, and a link
-is stored on the servers of the two documents it connects
-[kappe95scalable]. This ensures that all links to a document
+between documents on different servers is stored by both servers
+[kappe95scalable]. This ensures that all links from and to a document
 can always be found, but requires the cooperation 
-of both servers. Hyper-G employs a scalable protocol
+of both parties. Hyper-G employs a scalable protocol
 for notifying servers when a document has been moved or removed.
 A server hosting links to this document can then ask
 the link's author to change the link, or at least the link
 can be removed automatically. The *p-flood* algorithm
-employed by Hyper-G for this purpose guarantees that a message
+employed by Hyper-G guarantees that a message
 is delivered to all interested servers, but requires that each
 interested server keeps a list of all the others.
 
@@ -239,7 +242,7 @@
 it would be possible to find both the document and links to it,
 no matter which peer in the network they are stored on.
 
-XXX Say something about the usual resolvable URN approaches
+.. XXX Say something about the usual resolvable URN approaches
 
 
 2.2. Alternative versions
@@ -262,6 +265,8 @@
 as basis of communication channel among limited amount of participants. 
 Neither of these systems supports the immutability of data.
 
+.. thesis-benja: remove paragraph above
+
 [ref HTML version format proposal] Alternate versions important for
 authoring process [search refs]. (Note: Keeping track of versions
 structure is also \*hyper*media. Refs?) (WebDAV!)
@@ -270,6 +275,8 @@
 2.3. Peer-to-peer systems
 -------------------------
 
+.. thesis-benja: check what needs to be rewritten below
+
 During the last few years, there has been a lot of research
 related to peer-to-peer resource discovery, both academical and in the 
industry.
 There are two main approaches: broadcasting [gnutella1, kazaa, limewire,
@@ -360,6 +367,8 @@
 .. Should we discuss applications of p2p systems (CFS, OceanStore, Squirrel, 
...)
    here? If so, which ones?
 
+.. thesis-benja: remove paragraph below
+
 CFS [ref], which is built upon Chord DHT peer-to-peer routing layer[ref], 
stores 
 data as blocks. However, CFS *splits* data (files) into several miniblocks and 
 spreads blocks over the available CFS servers. Freenet [ref] and PAST [ref],
@@ -370,23 +379,22 @@
 Recently there has been some interest in peer-to-peer hypermedia.
 Thompson and de Roure [ref ht01] examine the discovery
 of documents and links available at and relating to
-a user's physical location. For example, this could include
+a user's physical location. An example would be
 a linkbase constructed from links made available by different
 participants of a meeting [thompson00weaving]. 
-Bouvin [ref 02] focuses on the scalability and ease of entry
-of peer-to-peer systems, examining ways in which p2p can serve
-as a basis for Open Hypermedia, while our own work has been 
+Bouvin [ref 02] focuses on the scalability and ease of publishing
+in peer-to-peer systems, examining ways in which p2p can serve
+as a basis for Open Hypermedia. Our own work has been 
 in implementing Xanalogical storage [ref 02].
 
 At the Hypertext'02 panel on peer-to-peer hypertext [ref],
 there was a lively discussion on whether the probabilistic access
 to documents offered by peers joining and leaving the network
 would be tolerable for hypermedia publishing. For many documents,
-the answer probably is no; however, for personal links,
-comments and notes about documents, this behavior may be acceptable,
-especially since this kind of publication would not require
-setting up a webspace account first and could therefore 
-encourage publication.
+the answer is probably no; however, for personal links,
+comments, and notes about documents, probabilistic access may be acceptable,
+especially when seen as a trade-off against
+having to set up a webspace account before publication.
 
 In the end, some peers will necessarily be more equal than others:
 Published data will be hosted on servers
@@ -415,14 +423,17 @@
 the cryptographic hash in the identifier. Therefore, we can 
 safely download blocks from an untrusted peer.
 
-While digital signatures also allow for self-certifying identifiers,
+While digital signatures also allow for self-certifying identifiers
+(the identifier could contain a public key, and we could check 
+the signature after downloading a block),
 they raise the need for a public-key infrastructure (PKI)
 and for a timestamping mechanism in order to be reliable
 for more than a short time.
 
 When we make a reference to a block, we can be sure
 that even the original author of the target will not be able 
-to change it. For example, if a newspaper refers to a letter
+to change it (contrast this with a signature-based scheme). 
+For example, if a newspaper refers to a letter
 to the editor this way, the letter's sender won't be able to change 
 the reference into an advertisement for a pornographic web page.
 
@@ -595,7 +606,7 @@
 possibly also uploading it to a server permanently connected
 to the Internet, if one is available.
 
-Unfortunately, we have not found a satisfactory representation
+We have unfortunately not found a satisfactory representation
 of zones yet. In particular, how do we decide which zone
 a new block should be in? Probably in the private zone
 in many cases, but if we have been editing a document