Re: OPES Re-Charter

> For the rules language, I'd like to have some more discussion on the
> scope. Previous discussions drifted a little bit into the space of a
> "programming language" for intermediary services. Originally, the
> rules language was meant to simply indicate to an OPES processor which
> services to invoke on a given message. Also, I'd assume that we'd
> build on the previous work that was done on "P". Any thoughts?

We could start from 'P' - may need some enhancements though . But I think  we
need to separate the 'runtime specification' and 'language specification' in
some form.

We can also  work on the method of  configuring  an OPES with some rules (may be
even by transporting) - if that can be under the purview of the WG..

> Thanks,
>    Markus
>
> Markus Hofmann wrote: