- From: Paul Grous <Paul_Grous.NOTES@crd.lotus.com>
- Date: 25 Jun 95 22:53:45 EDT
- To: www-mail <www-mail@crd.lotus.com>
- Cc: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>, rating <rating@junction.net>, www-talk <www-talk@www10.w3.org>, uri <uri@bunyip.com>, leslie <leslie@bunyip.com>
g'day, Hmmm, I looked at the CC list and asked myself which to cut, but since I'm not on all those lists and would thus miss certain replies, I'll beg the reader's indulgence for just a minute. I want to focus on the agent component of the previous posting and ask that follow-ups to this new thread go to the URI list, which is where we are currently persuing this work. In this posting I'm going to provide some details of URAs (our proposal for Uniform Resource Agents) and Silk (our first application which supports URAs). If you don't want to see this, hit your equivalent of `n' now... [ Brian wrote: ] } . . . I've been thinking a lot about the situation, and it } seems to me that a simple solution would be to combine a filtering } application with an existing HTTP (or other protocol) proxy server. } . . . The filters could be combined as well, and updated using } HTTP transaction. I really don't believe this is a huge technological } problem - I think one could take the CERN or TIS proxy and with 4 } engineer-months create a filtering application. Actually, the first testbed application is essentially done, although it doesn't use proxy servers or work at the individual protocol level. This is exactly the kind of thing we envision for Uniform Resource Agents, which are objects which we propose as a mechanism for packaging up net expertise. As we define them, URAs are capable of searching, accessing and filtering available Internet resources without requiring the user to provide, or even be aware of, specific access mechanisms. We don't use proxies, since we think architecturally it makes more sense to move the agent manipulation onto the desktop, as this is the cheapest resource the user can access. Still, I think they can do what you want out of the box. We are currently testing "Silk", our first application for this URA technology, and hope to turn a version loose to the net in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, it's available for willing beta-testers now. Architecturally what distinguishes URAs from other agent proposals, such as Knowbots or Hot Java, is that we focus on URAs as objects that exist and are managed in the client's local space. When invoked, a URA probes out to the net for searching and access. Results are then accepted, sorted and/or filtered and then presented to the user. We do hope/expect to see URA authors sharing new URAs across the net, but normally we forsee users invoking their own copy of a URA, which has been presumably tested/approved for local use. With this approach we do not require trusted access to outside servers to run (a la Knowbots), nor do we assume that we will be down-loading applets from non-trusted outside servers (a la Hot Java). More importantly, we see URAs as existing at an operational layer above access protocols. With our first client we have already integrated them with existing Mosaic-based browsing technology, so that users will use MOsaic or Netscape to browse individual items. At the same time, we aren't forcing users to use an external server for mediated access. We think this is necessary for scaling, if nothing else. The results lists generated by URAs in our client are presented to the user as a set of headlines (you can think of them as a form of URN, since they name resources without specifying access, although they don't use any of the current URN proposals yet). Most importantly, with our approach there is is not a URL in sight during the initial specification and access. Once the user invokes an object they are prompted for any needed information (eg. search terms if it is a search) and then the access is performed. Results are then presented as a set of headlines for viewing, and once a headline is selected, the associated URL is passed to the browser (currently Mosaic/Netscape) for access. This approach effectively hides URLs (and thus access info) from the user entirely until the client hits the browser step. If you provide a suitable browser, the physical access information need never appear to the user at all. We feel that among other things, this will go a long way to providing client-driven client-driven content filtering, which seems to be the only effective way to implement content control on the net. At the same time, it will free users from thinking of their information in terms of access at all, which is our greater and more important goal. Silk is the first application we've developed which manages access to URAs. It provides an object library manager, a search/access manager and integrated access to those versions of Mosaic/Netscape which currently provide a usable API. Silk agents are currently implemented as suitably structured Tcl scripts which may be customized and shared by users, although in a future release we plan a client-server based version of URAs which will hide the actual implementation of the objects from the user. Our long term goal is to hide both agent implementation and access mechanisms such as URLs but we feel there's lots to be learned about typing of acess results and so on before this can be done successfully. As I mentioned at the start, Silk code is now in the hand of a limited set of beta testers, with a tentative release date to the net in the next few weeks. We'd be happy to share it with anyone on this list who wants to examine it. For more info you can send email to the project manager, Leslie Daigle at "leslie@bunyip.com". She's out of the office this week, but _is_ checking email. If you CC me on the mail, I'll see someone replies as soon as possible. } I've outlined many of these thoughts in a short paper at } } http://www.organic.com/Staff/brian/community-filters.html Got the paper and and the only problem I have with it is the assumption that architecturally we want everything going through HTTP proxy servers, as these form a natural bottleneck and leave the user with a browser that can still effectively see the entire world. From our perspective, it also is suboptimal since it requires users to continue viewing the net in terms of access protocols ("http://" indeed). I want users selecting items based upon names like "Stock Quoter" or "Book Search". Let the object figure out how to find the server. I'm happy to use servers to supply a URA to the client for execution, but want the executing code to be as close to the user as possible. Otherwise we can expect scaling problems with proxies being swamped by demand, and security problems since users are still essentially armed with a generalized browser and can potentially see the entire net if your filtering fails. This doesn't mean all processing should be on the client machine, but we should look at approaches that move at least some of it onto the desktop since, as I said earlier, it's the cheapest net resource a user has access to. . . . } We looked at doing this as a software development project, but the } product liability issues are absolutely enourmous, so we're concentrating } on other things. We would be willing to help support a public-domain } development effort, a la Apache and VRML. I'm not sure I'm as pessimistic as you are on the product liability front, but our emphasis has been on providing an environment in which agents can be used, rather than providing specific agents. I'm hoping/expecting developers for specific communities to supply their own agents, tuned to their needs. We're also not generally focused on the issue of censorship, viewing this as a spinoff of the agent mechanism, rather than the goal of our work. What we really want to do is hide access mechanisms and get users thinking in terms of information, not access protocols. If this permits users to more easily develop content filters, that's a bonus for us. - peterd -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ...there is reason to hope that the machines will use us kindly, for their existance will be in a great measure dependent on ours; they will rule us with a rod of iron, but they will not eat us... - Samuel Butler, 1872 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 26 June 1995 18:12:15 UTC