thanks for the input. protocols are the wrong sort of thing, i think. that would be like saying another way to talk about the national highway system is to talk about the driving rules. (regardless of how important those rules, and protocols, in general, are.)
after a quick read of teh FMC, the best term might be “compositional structure”, but thats uglier than communications web (i think). > On Aug 24, 2016, at 9:04 AM, Andriy Drozdyuk <dro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Protocols? > > > The FMC folks use "channels" to describe this kind of stuff: > http://www.fmc-modeling.org <http://www.fmc-modeling.org/> > Sounds like you might benefit from a "system map": > http://www.fmc-modeling.org/fmcbook <http://www.fmc-modeling.org/fmcbook> > On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 at 11:31 Andrew Hume <and...@humeweb.com > <mailto:and...@humeweb.com>> wrote: > in discussions within my group, we often refer to the complete data flows > between the various > parts of a distributed application as a “communication web”. this includes a > bunch of different > stuff, including (but not limited to) normal zeromq links, pub-sub > connections, broker-mediated > links, job queues. > > technically, this is more like a directed graph of data flow. > > the term “communication web” is clumsy at best. are there better terms we > could use? how do people on > this list describe the data flow parts of their architectures? > > andrew > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org <mailto:zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > <http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev>_______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
