Applications Messaging Standard

[Paul Harrison]

Reading though the list, there seems to be a fair bit of disagreement  
about the scope of this standard - why not take the approach that has  
been taken in other areas and first define a "simple" version of the  
protocol, which is essentially has exactly the same scope as PLASTIC  
as it currently stands - while being careful to avoid non-PC  
acronyms ;-).. Then have a discussion about some all-conquering  
application messaging standard as a separate thread.

There are several simplifying aspects to the current PLASTIC scope  
and design that have made it a success;

* it works for a single user being the only user on a single desktop
      - do not need to worry about security - only respond to  
messages that originate from localhost.
      - do not have to worry about complicated topologies for delivery.
* it does define the message format and the transport (ignore the  
java RMI aspect - everyone agrees that should be dropped)
      - XMLRPC is widely supported even in simple scripting languages  
(no socket programming necessary)
* it is designed for interactive messages
     - guaranteed delivery etc. not so important - it is obvious to  
the user when something is not working - it should just happen now....

I think that a decision to make a slightly cleaned up PLASTIC *the*  
Simple application messaging standard would be a great benefit to the  
VO.


Paul Harrison
ESO Garching
www.eso.org