[Standards-JIG] Re: CALL FOR FEEDBACK: JEP-0060

Daniel Henninger jadestorm at nc.rr.com
Wed May 31 12:19:01 UTC 2006

Just my own 2 cents... I find the large document to be "just fine".   
I'm often a fan of being able to print out a large document (or do  
simple text searches on it) to find what I'm looking for instead of  
knowing that I need to look in JEP-0123, JEP-0125, JEP-0130 ...  
what?  I'm supposed to look at JEP-0144 as well? ... you know what I  
mean?  It's got a table of context w/links, which should make it just  
as easy to find things you are looking for as multiple JEPs.

Anyway, I would say that if a 'more simple' document is desired, it  
would make a good Wiki entry.  "A simple introduction to how to  
implement pubsub" or something.


On May 31, 2006, at 1:42 AM, Bob Wyman wrote:

> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I think that Peter Millard intended JEP-0060 to be complete.
>> All that I've tried to do is make the complete spec easier
>> to understand and implement. So I guess I vote for complete.
> 	I would also "vote" for complete. I think we've got enough
> experience with publish/subscribe systems to have a pretty good  
> idea of what
> needs to be defined and we've got enough variety and experience with
> JEP-0060 implementations to know that there is a real need for just  
> about
> everything in the spec. Making it "simple" now is only going to  
> make it hard
> for folk to build what they need to build. If folk want "simple,"  
> that would
> be best achieved by developing a simplified profile based on  
> JEP-0060 rather
> than crippling JEP-0060.
> 		bob wyman

More information about the Standards mailing list