From what I can tell, the requirement for it seemed to pop out of figure
4 in opes-model-00. I believe that if that diagram were drawn with a
box just below the callout server, called a "OPES gateway intermediary"
(or surrogate), then that would prevent the need for a standardized
protocol. The protocol between "OPES intermediary" and "OPES gateway
intermediary" would be the primary protocol of the chain of
intermediaries, and the protocol between "OPES gateway intermediary" and
the callout server wouldn't matter; whatever it happened to be, a
gateway could be developed to bridge the two protocols.
In the above, is the intent to have the OPES gateway intermediary
communicate with the OPES intermediary via software API or on-the-wire
If the latter then surely the standardized callout protocol becomes that
channel of communication (which means the protocol needs to consider
potential transcoding issues that may occur, er, yuk ;-) ).
No, the protocol between intermediaries is a transfer protocol, such as
HTTP, SMTP, SOAP/HTTP, etc..
We must be disconnected, but I'm not sure where. Let's dig a little
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker(_at_)planetfred(_dot_)com