> > Are you guys talking about node ID's or I/O ID's? For I/O's, I > agree that a > > name may be better than some randomly assigned number. And you > certainly > > don't need a URI for each I/O, since it's the node (that the I/O's > are > > attached to) that has the URI. > > We were talking about node IDs. And, yup, I think names are better, as > Jean-Marc suggested. I'll switch stuff over to using this and phase > out ids. And nope, we don't need anything fancy like URIs for inputs. Perhaps we were discussing two different things at once. I was talking about inputs ids for nodes. I don't care about nodes having a name of ID (in Overflow, nodes have a name, which is usually node1, node2, ...). However, it is important that we can connect nodes using an input (or output) name, and not an id. Jeff Wrote: > Besides the pipe (connector) windowlet, there is a dot at the end of each pipe > that can hold a SHORT name or number. > The problem with having names tag along with the ENDS of the pipes, is that > the ends are connected together, thus names will overlap and be obscured. > I could also position names along the center of the pipes. I'll think about > it. I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. ...but what I mean by input/output name can be seen at http://freespeech.on.openprojects.net/08-03-00_023954_screenshot.jpg for the FDSaveFrame screenshot. For example, if we have a Divide node, it's important to show which input is the numerator and which one is the denominator. Jean-Marc -- Jean-Marc Valin Universite de Sherbrooke - Genie Electrique valj01 at gel.usherb.ca