Dear all,
In terms of direction from the IVOA, the exec has put it into our hands by approving our work plan. There is no decree to make a cleaned-up PLASTIC an IVOA standard, but I think it should certainly be considered as a first important step. This can be done on a short time scale and I would suggest that at this stage of the development of the VO, the benefits of having working implementations within months out-weighs waiting months more for the spec.
Astronomers like PLASTIC because it 'just works', and developers like it because it is flexible and easy to implement. It is enabling interoperability between tools that we haven't really seen before, and this is stimulating innovation. I believe that we (the VO) need this simple interoperability now, and we need it to be an IVOA supported thing.
The discussion has been enormously useful in mapping out the scope of messaging in the VO in general, and the proposed message container + content model approach looks like the longer term answer. Even though this more general scheme calls for agreeing on the message container from the beginning, it appears we are not ready to re-cast PLASTIC into this framework just yet. A working prototype of the container + content model scheme would go a long way to gaining support for this, and also for highlighting the benefits it brings to those more general (precise message) use cases. I think that the decision on evolution versus revolution for PLASTIC style messaging would be better addressed when the more general scheme has been demonstrated.
-Mark. Received on 2007-04-17Z10:41:52