--- In [email protected], Gregg Wonderly <ge...@...> wrote: > > The simple issue is that the use of the term RPC (perhaps RPC-like > would make it less implementation like) is still being taken as an > "implementation" rather than an "architectural" mechanism.
I understand the pain. I encountered the same issue when promoting the notion that EDA could be applied to the highest levels of architecture--but most felt it only made sense as an implementation detail. I couldn't convince many (any?) that looking at significant events would be a worthwhile exercise and that EDA != pub/sub. -Rob
