RE: [obix-xml] <ext>

I just re-read this after reviewing the comments on UBL. I think this
aligns oBIX well with BEA, one of the few SOA groups that focusses on
cordination and transactions.

Both assertions feel correct [to me].

tc

-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Hansen [mailto:] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 4:35 PM
To: Obix-Xml-Sc (E-mail)
Subject: [obix-xml] <ext>

Binding multiple services of the same type:

We've talked about issues of binding multiple history services into one oBIX
server.  The more I think about it the more I can dismiss it.  oBIX probably
won't be the native protocol of the true history implementation, oBIX is
only the enterprise interface.  Therefore, perhaps it is best that there is
only one oBIX history (or whatever) service and it represents the aggregate
of all the underlaying implementations.


Inheritence

We've discussed defining <ext> and letting implementations subclass it.  I
don't have a problem with that, but I think it is important to support a
plugin model.  I think someone should be able to add new extensions to an
exisiting server without changing the server's schema.