These seem to be more applicable to demoing Squeak. Whereas my intent
(well-understood by Andreas) is to use Squeak as a tool (if necessary, if
possible) to explain the essence of our work. Which basically boils down to
paid riddle/puzzle solving, not?

(whether it's riddle of puzzle solving depends on the quality of the specs
:-)).


Jerzy Karczmarczuk <karczma at info.unicaen.fr> said:
>1. Show that computers can hold THINGS which obey simple commands. Not only
>   textual: Bunny jump.  grasshopper move. etc., but also *gestual*. Show
>   that anybody, even a 5-year old Master can communicate with those
>   objects.
>
>2. Show that the objects are persistant, that the kids may do something they
>   find nice, and 
>   a. they may send it to their pals. They may share it!
>   b. they may *keep* it for a few minutes, or a week; they may change it.
>
>3. Show that the environment is safe. That they can't really spoil anything.
>   (Weeelll, we know they can, but keep that secret for a moment...)
>


-- 
Cees de Groot               http://www.cdegroot.com     <cg at cdegroot.com>
GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD  1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B