Applications Messaging Standard

[Alasdair Allan]

Doug Tody wrote:
> If we try to think about this a bit more formally, what we need to
> define is merely an "interface" (e.g., in the sense of a modern
> language such as Java etc.) which provides certain well-defined
> operations with well-defined semantics.  An "implementation" like
> the PLASTIC hub merely implements this interface.  So long as some
> software implements the interface in a compliant fashion, it doesn't
> matter how it is implemented.

Well no. Are we going to use a hierarchical, peer-to-peer or hub  
based system? Before we decide on the message format, protocol for  
exchanging the messages and a transport standards for exchanging them  
over, then we really have to decide on what sort of topology we're  
talking about. There are fundamental differences between building a  
standard around an entirely peer-to-peer architecture, than building  
one which uses a central hub!

Al.