Two more use cases
--------------------------------
I want to do a SCA/AMQP Binding for Tuscany and I would want to leverage the
protocol artifacts using a more intutive API and not JMS or an extended JMS.
There is also a JMS binding and if use the same interface then were is the
differentiation factor?

The differentiation would be that there is an "extended JMS" API for
AMQ. So that API does not duplicate existing JMS concepts but adds
AMQP concepts to it - for example, the immediate flag.

I also want to use AMQP as a protocol for Axis2. Now I really haven't though
about this, but some of the unique features that AMQP offers maybe useful if
they can be accessed using a more natural API than through JMS.

The idea is not that you would be limited to JMS "lowest common
denominator" functionality but that you could exploit AMQP where
appropriate but via the extra methods and classes exposed in
conjunction with JMS.

Or do you actually want to work at the protocol level? If so, we need
to understand why the JMS API is deficient.

RG

Reply via email to