Of course, philosophy is about opinion and engineering is about deeds, with science the happy medium somewhere in between. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that most of my ideas from then on took their roots from Simula–but not as an attempt to improve it. It was the promise of an entirely new way to structure computations that took my fancy. As it turned out, it would take quite a few years to understand how to use the insights and to devise efficient mechanisms to execute them.

(emphasis mine) The paradigm shift has been underway for a few decades now – Sun’s “the network is the computer” slogan was coined in 1984. So the challenge would seem to remain finding ways to apply the insights. O’Reilly’s 2000 essay The Network Really Is The Computer provides an excellent blend of insight and application in the context of how ecosystems evolve.

Taking it a step further, my closing point was suggesting that a core matrix of data points — comprising embedded intelligence — could be structured so the same data points would always show up in the same locations. Mechanical, perhaps grouped by form factors(say extrusion wall thickness @ strength characteristics); FEA/stress data; material properties(including conductance/E-M). At first glance, this may seem superfluous at the mechanical level, but many in aerospace & marine applications are all too aware of dissimilar metal issues. Yet this would provide a natural lead-in to the inclusion of electroconductive, perhaps even electromotive properties as the assembly in question meshes into the bridge realm of electromechanical packaging & design.

With this approach, Dr. Funkencode’s assertions regarding the integrated design of software/hardware/firmware would have a fertile starting ground, particularly as motion dynamics data points(at least at the subassembly level) were included in the set, providing useful ref’s for programmers, and designers up the assembly tree.

So if the formatting of the data is driven by need/design intent/utility, it would likely be more self-streamlining, with the premium put on simplicity & utility than arbitrary structures.

In this context, the good Dr.’s ref to “Why not divide it up into little computers…” is an interesting parallel to some ancient insights. In ancient Egypt, the human body was seen as the highest form of design. We now know, as some did then, that the human body is not a ‘main frame’ design, with the brain running everything, but rather a distributed computing system with intelligent nodes — the sense, organs, even the skin and nervous system — each competent and well orchestrated in jazz idiom to heartbeat rhythms. Applied to mechanical/electronic/electromechanical design, such an approach as paradigm would generate a shift in focus, values and options whose harvest is to vast to predict here.

On another note, I agree that the so-called “intelligent components” approach points in the right direction because they encourage cleaner, more object-oriented architecture under the hood. However, a better file format isn’t what’s needed – more on that shortly.

As to an open source CAD application, there have been some efforts, of course, but nothing of note imo. Not yet anyway. However, I suspect we’ll see something emerge in the next few years. There are too many talented people and too many possible opportunities available for it not to happen afaic. I’d say 3-5 years is about right.

Yes, they still have many of the same file-sharing problems, but there are bridges(Gerber, among others). The point is that one big leap in PCB CAD was the introduction of intelligent components, particularly at the schematic level(for instance a resistor schematic component has package, resistance and power rating parameters embedded). If parametric 3D models were embedded with analogous intelligence regarding materials, FEA, etc., much more than design intent would be captured, and a more informed usage of the design would be possible by other designers who might pick it up. Material/weight/FEA data would help trade-off choices, and establishing a standard for such embedding could be the core skeleton around which a multi-use CAD file format could be crafted…..

If nothing else, such an approach would further empower the bridging/merging — yes, *meshing* — of the electronic & mechanical CAD realms into a unified suite.

Next question: Where does ParallelGraphics fit into this equation?