on “naming is hard”
That may be a good term, if interpreted in analgy to virtual image; in contrast, it seems to me that in virtual object systems, Vobjects are rather communicating computational processes running on machines. Closing off this paragraph on terminoloogy, maybe we could just go with live object with a much better picture here.
on “what does it actually correspond to?”
Now, if we look at the mathematical formalization of Anoma with a notion of object that has an object ID[1] (in anology to object IDs in tango), I wonder what the natural language counterpart to objects in idealized Anoma would be. More concretely then, one related question is how we talk about tango-object-like things to users (while developers may be happy with tango-like object). For the specific context of application development, we may go with something like application object.
In short, I very much do like the “pedagogical thing” and as you wrote,
and so I go back to figuring out the details of what the Anoma counterpart to tango-objects could be in the mathematical formalization of Anoma, in particular how user-interaction is modelled there.
Suppose for the moment that we can find agreement that such a thing would be useful there. ↩︎