My goodness, Joe. I'm glad you're on this list. I really am.

I'll respond to your message in the next note. You're right. I ought wind myself up to tell those in the know just what makes it different.

One thing I can tell you though is that it's been an over-riding concern of mine for quite a long time, and my method of discovery has had no straight lines to it. Consequently, my manner of disclosure has reflected this. (And this is a good thing, due to the nature of the project.)

My purpose in writing these notes is three-fold:

1. To describe what exists currently as rough sketches in my design books and as a software system (ThoughtShop for OS/2) informally in words so that I can put it into a formal precise paper.

2. To get input from people, as many aspects of the design are still evolving.

3. To get people involved in the idea, the social side as well as the formal side . . . to convey my intentions for the thing, and get people at least thinking, "What kind of technology would best be suited for the changes to come?" Looking around at what exists, I see many pieces, but no attempt to bring everything together into a useful, simple, and inspiring paradigm.

(By the way, the closest thing, according to what I've read, to ThoughtShop is Ted Nelson's Xanadu project... this is being funded by Autodesk.)

Again, thanks for the gentle slap toward spelling things out (already!).

Tim