RE: Proposal: A Registry Browser GUI tool

[Marc Breissinger <marcb@webmethods.com>]

David,

You write:

> What I want it the flexibility to use a tailored RegRep mechanism
> where it makes sense - Reg <-> Reg comm's is one obvious
> area.  Even within this scenario I'm seeing that  http/MIME
> make sense, just that we will need error handling, enveloping and
> interaction models that are specific and TRP will be clumsy in
> those scenarios.

If indeed there are elements of the TRP that will be clumsy for RegRep interactions, let's enumerate them and fix the TRP, not start
advocating the use of alternate messaging services.  IMHO, if the TRP cannot handle the relatively simple interactions defined by
the current draft of the RegRep specifications, it has little hope of adoption.  What is the specific technical basis (to use Nick's
words) upon which you make the assertion that the TRP is too clumsy for use in RegRep interactions?

marc

==========================================================================
Marc Breissinger                                   voice (W): 703-460-2504
Director, Product Strategy - webMethods, Inc.      voice (C): 703-989-7689
Email:  marcb@webmethods.com                               We're hiring!!!
Email2: breissim@earthlink.net              URL: http://www.webmethods.com
==========================================================================