[mythtv] MythSOAP Expressions Of Interest

Derek Watson DerekW at intergen.co.nz
Thu Feb 24 20:00:11 UTC 2005


Surely building mythsoap as an optional integration abstraction layer
has little or no impact upon the existing protocol. This is what I
thought was originally proposed by Adam, and I'm still interested in
helping make it happen.

Despite it's bulky nature, XML is superb to program against from a
productivity perspective, and in most cases the marshalling of XML
messages vs binary messages doesn't add too much latency.

Overhauling the mythprotocol to use UPnP would be a fairly intensive
effort, but would seem to be a forward looking endeavour. 

-----Original Message-----
From: mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org
[mailto:mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org] On Behalf Of Simon Kenyon
Sent: Tuesday, 22 February 2005 14:59
To: Development of mythtv
Subject: Re: [mythtv] MythSOAP Expressions Of Interest

On Monday 21 February 2005 22:48, Brad Templeton wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 04:14:18PM -0500, Isaac Richards wrote:
> > everything much more complicated than it really needs to be.  If 
> > there's a more standard system available that can replace the 
> > existing backend protocol, I'm all for switching to that.
>
> There are several RPC systems -- SOAP, Corba, DCOM (microsoft), 
> XML-RPC and some older ones and some that are more specific to certain

> languages like C++.
i would have thought that the uPNP framework was a perfect fit for this
--
simon
_______________________________________________
mythtv-dev mailing list
mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list