Apps Messaging - Semantics of a Message

[Mark Taylor]

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Doug Tody wrote:

> It seems to me that we are still defining a standard service model
> for each type of data, but just doing it in an adhoc fashion, by
> defining operations at random as they need arises (which is, alas,
> the way a lot of software is designed).

there are times when ad hoc design is bad news, but I don't see this
as one of them.  In PLASTIC, defining messages for specific 
messaging/data-sharing requirements as they arise has worked quite
well.

The idea of agreeing up front on a structured hierarchical vocabulary 
of mtypes intended to cover most or all semantic requirements 
does not fill me with joy; it is likely to require a lot of work to
achieve agreement, will inevitably be incomplete, and will 
probably contain a large number of messages which never get used.
I would much prefer to agree on a small number of mtypes which 
we know we need, and augment the list on an ad hoc basis as 
indicated by emerging specific requirements of applications 
which need to do particular jobs.

Mark

-- 
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-928-8776 http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/