vote on Proposed changes to PLASTIC for 1.0
dtody at nrao.edu
Fri May 4 09:23:08 PDT 2007
Hi Mark -
I looked at this, but it appears to concern only near-term changes
to PLASTIC, which is mostly a concern of the folks currently using
PLASTIC who will be impacted by these changes. It is a good thing
to move PLASTIC more in the direction we think we are going longer
term, but my main concern (and probably a few others like me) is what
happens next. All I suggest is that the roadmap might also include a
follow-on effort to address the more general applications messaging
problem (this can continue to retain support for a PLASTIC-like
capability), and that this go foward after PLASTIC 1.0 is out,
including both design and prototyping.
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Mark Allen wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Just a reminder to fill out the voting table for the proposed
> changes to PLASTIC.
> It is important to get your input there ASAP, and certainly
> before the Beijing Interop meeting.
>> From John Taylor April : http://www.ivoa.net/forum/apps/0704/0421.htm
>> Over the last year a number of changes have been suggested for PLASTIC, and
>> the discussions on this list have thrown up a few more. Rising to Mike's
>> challenge, I've collected them on this wiki page:
>> All of these changes can be made while retaining backwards compatibility
>> with current PLASTIC apps, at least in the short term. If I've missed
>> something important, please let me know. Some of the changes are lacking
>> a sponsor: if you want to adopt one then go ahead, or I'll delete it if it
>> gets no support. I've taken the liberty of attributing some of the changes
>> to Mark and Mike - feel free to remove your name if I've got it wrong.
>> So, cast your votes for the changes you want to see, and those you don't.
>> Please do take part - it's important we get your views, *particularly* from
>> people who intend to develop applications against
>> this protocol.
More information about the apps