> It seems to me that platform abstractions in general need to be handled in
> the image and not in the VM.  Do people generally agree with that?  Platform
> dependent issues need to be modeled in the image with higher level, platform
> independent abstractions built on top.  Only the simplest platform
> independent abstractions need to be in the VM.  To do otherwise would IMHO
> make the VM unnecessarily large and complex.
Nicely put! As a general rule I would want to push anything possible up
from the VM into the image, or at least some variety of policy/settings
capability. Keyboard mapping, mouse handling, file name stuff, all seem
obvious candidates.

Since we have named plugin-primitives and loadable fractional
images (caveat- not tried it yet) we really have no excuse whatsoever if we
can't come up with some sensible arrangement.

tim
-- 
Why Dogs Hate WIn95:-10)  Oh, but they WILL... with the introduction of the Microsoft Opposable Thumb.
Tim Rowledge:  rowledge at interval.com (w)  +1 (650) 842-6110 (w)
 tim at sumeru.stanford.edu (h)  <http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim>