[infod-wg] Re: Abstract for spec

[Dieter Gawlick]

I like the general idea but do not like to tell what WS-Notification can 
not yet do:

Here is my proposal:

Notification-based interaction is very common as noted by the authors of the WS-Notification family of specifications. WS-Notification offers a basic topic-based publish/subscribe pattern complemented by a notify operation.

INFOD (Information Dissemination)uses the same notify operation. Additionally, INFOD provides a general means to determine which messages are to be sent from which publishers to which consumers based upon information kept in a registry. To support this, INFOD allows the characterization of publishers, consumers and various other components using vocabularies that are meaningful to members of the /communities/ they belong to. 

INFOD also extends the publish/subscribe paradigm by allowing consumers to be determined dynamically based on the message content. Additionally, INFOD allows subscribers to determine which messages should be created in response to events.



Fisher, SM (Steve) wrote:
> I thought it would be good to get an abstract that we can agree upon.
> Apart from the comments in the current draft I would like to emphasise
> that we are adding to WSN. So may I suggest something very different:
>
>
>   Notification-based interaction are very common as noted by the
>   authors of the WS-Notification family of specifications.
>   WS-Notification offers a topic-based publish/subscribe pattern but
>   provides no help to subscribers to locate suitable producers.
>
>   This INFOD (Information Dissemination) base specification uses the
>   same notify operation but builds on WS-Notification by providing more
>   general means to determine which messages are sent from Publishers
>   (or NotificationProducers in WS-Notification terminology) to
> Consumers. INFOD is
>   based around a registry that holds information about the publishers
>   and consumers and other components. INFOD makes
>   use of a vocabulary mechanism to allow a community to define
>   properties of the various components and the messages in a way which
>   is meaningful to them.
>
>
> I am certainly not happy with this yet - but would like to ask people if
> I am
> going in the right direction and to sugest improvements!
>
> I am not sure if the infod list is working so some of you will get this
> twice
>
>      
> Steve
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/infod-wg/attachments/20060607/4f3c31f9/attachment.htm