On Friday, August 15, 2014 17:23:11 Dave Crocker wrote:
On 8/15/2014 2:36 PM, Stephen Kent wrote:
I’m not fond of the phrase “protocol design pattern”. I don’t recall
ever hearing that phrase before. If you substituted “guidelines” or
“principle” for pattern that would be more in keeping with existing
terminology.
I was surprised by the term, but mostly felt it was at least trying to
move discussion in a useful direction, compared with earlier claims,
such as that it was a 'protocol'.
However a quick search on the term produced some troubling existing
usages that conflict with the usage in the draft:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_protocol_pattern
"...a design pattern, applied within the service-orientation design
paradigm, which attempts to make services, within a service
inventory,[1] interoperable with each other by standardizing the
communication protocols used by the services. This eliminates the need
for bridging communication protocols when services use different
communication protocols.["
and:
http://www.eventhelix.com/realtimemantra/patterncatalog/protocol_layer.htm
"Provide a common framework for implementing different layers of a
protocol stack."
d/
So what's your preferred color for the bike shed?
Scott K