This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Last revision Both sides next revision | ||
research:doforreal [2010/08/04 13:16] stijnm reworked |
research:doforreal [2010/08/04 15:01] alombide |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Distributed Objects for Real ====== | ====== Distributed Objects for Real ====== | ||
- | Over the past year, a number of researchers at the Software Languages Lab have been involved in experiments designed to uncover new programming abstractions to facilitate the development of mobile RFID-enabled applications. | + | Over the past year, a number of researchers at the Software Languages Lab have been involved in experiments designed to uncover new programming abstractions to facilitate the development of mobile RFID-enabled applications. |
During these experiments, | During these experiments, | ||
- | == Volatile Data Clouds == | + | ===== Volatile Data Clouds |
< | < | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
occurrences, | occurrences, | ||
- | == Tags Objects == | + | ===== Proxy Objects |
- | While the //volatile data clouds// | + | < |
+ | The proxy objects | ||
+ | </ | ||
- | When treating tags as objects, it is important to deal with the ephemeral nature of the connection between the mobile application and any particular tag. A first problem to be tackled is how applications detect new tags as they come into range. | + | While the //volatile data clouds// model considers RFID tags to be containers |
- | Once a tag object | + | When interacting with these proxy objects, one has to deal with the ephemeral nature |
+ | the interaction | ||
- | While messages are implicitly buffered during | + | First of all, mobile RFID-enabled applications need a means to detect when a particular tagged object |
+ | mechanism to achieve this is to use the default [[at: | ||
- | Within the tag object | + | Once a proxy object |
- | == Comparison == | + | By aligning tagged objects with remote objects, one can develop mobile RFID-enabled applications without having to learn about a new concept. |
- | Having implemented both models, it remains unclear whether one of the models presented in this paper is to be preferred over the other. | + | A particularly interesting abstraction when developing mobile RFID-enabled applications are [[research: |
- | The volatile data clouds model treats RFID tags as simple containers of data and aims at providing applications with expressive means to represent a collection of nearby tags which is constantly in flux. Consequently, | + | ===== Comparison ===== |
- | The tag objects model on the other hand treats the contents of an RFID tag as a full-fledged object. | + | Having implemented both models, we have found their virtues and limitations to be largely complementary. |
+ | |||
+ | The volatile data clouds model treats RFID tags as simple containers of data and aims at providing applications with expressive means to represent a collection of nearby tags which is constantly in flux. Consequently, | ||
+ | |||
+ | The tag objects model on the other hand treats the contents of an RFID tag as a full-fledged object. | ||
In all likelihood, a programming model that fully leverages the advantages of a world teeming with tagged objects will incorporate elements of both models presented here. | In all likelihood, a programming model that fully leverages the advantages of a world teeming with tagged objects will incorporate elements of both models presented here. | ||
- | == Further Reading == | + | ===== Further Reading |
* Distributed Objects for Real. Stijn Mostinckx, Andoni Lombide Carreton, Kevin Pinte, Wolfgang De Meuter. Technical report, 2010, Vrije Universiteit Brussel [[|pdf]] | * Distributed Objects for Real. Stijn Mostinckx, Andoni Lombide Carreton, Kevin Pinte, Wolfgang De Meuter. Technical report, 2010, Vrije Universiteit Brussel [[|pdf]] |