Apps Messaging - Semantics of a Message

[Tony Linde]

>     Certainly it was the success of PLASTIC that started the 
> discussion,
> but I believe our mandate here is for an 'applications 
> messaging standard'
> and not simply a cleaned-up PLASTIC.  To the extent PLASTIC 

Why can we not have both? The 'cleaned up PLASTIC' *ought* to take a lot
less time and could be agreed before Sept. In parallel and carrying on from
that, some more formal and extensive messaging framework could be worked on.
As long as all apps developers know that the new std will replace and make
obsolete the old one with no guarantee of backwards compatibility then there
should be no problem.

The longer this debate continues, the more likely that Plastic will become a
de facto std like cone search: and that will definitely happen if we try to
formulate a complete messaging framework from the off. It would be better if
the IVOA had a hand in the 'cleaned up PLASTIC' though.

Or, we could simply accept that PLASTIC *is* the de facto IVOA app-interop
standard and leave it to the people using and defining that to develop the
'cleaned up PLASTIC' standard.

T.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-apps at eso.org [mailto:owner-apps at eso.org] On 
> Behalf Of Mike Fitzpatrick
> Sent: 16 April 2007 11:54
> To: apps at ivoa.net
> Subject: Re: Apps Messaging - Semantics of a Message
> 
>         This thread is long enough already so please forgive me for
> mixing replies to several messages to respond to just a few points.
> 
> 
> Noel writes:
> 
> > It is my understanding that it was the real-world success of
> > plastic that piqued IVOA's interest in messaging. I talked to
> > several of the exec whilst at moscow - the impression I got was
> > that their desire was for a plastic-like cleaned-up international
> > standard.
> 
>     Certainly it was the success of PLASTIC that started the 
> discussion,
> but I believe our mandate here is for an 'applications 
> messaging standard'
> and not simply a cleaned-up PLASTIC.  To the extent PLASTIC 
> can evolve to
> meet the needs of all apps then that is a valid path, but 
> we've already
> identified several use-cases (both specific and more general 
> philosophies)
> where this becomes a problem eventually.  If PLASTIC didn't 
> already exist
> I think everyone would be happy with a quick implementation that does
> the plastic-like messaging *so long as* we had a basic 
> framework where the
> other cases could be added easily later on.  Knowingly 
> excluding a certain
> set of use cases because what's in use is "good enough for now" is not
> the best we can do.


http://www.Taglocity.com Tags: IVOA, apps,