Talk:Messaging pattern

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force.

Not good in its present state

This is an article with two definitional terms:

messaging pattern
messaging exchange pattern

One is scope to software architecture, the other is scoped to telecommunications.

Not one word is said to indicate the relationship between the two. Are they minor variants, or unified in name only? Is one subordinate to the other? (Telecommunications could be construed as subordinate to software architecture).

Then when you get to SOAP, it's explicitly linked to MEP—at least in part.

In the ØMQ section, it's linked to neither.

Furthermore, are these just random topics that happened to land, or does this somehow sort of cover the essential bases for this topic item?

I assess this page in its present form as creating more problems than it resolves. If the relationship of anything on this page to anything else on this page were made more explicit, this page might yet see the first inkling of light at the end of the tunnel.

Consider this my formal invitation to the next qualified editor to dive in with a sharp knife. — MaxEnt 18:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with [user:MaxEnt|MaxEnt] The MQ section is referring to implementation libraries and not in the same way as SOAP nor REST "patterns", I would recommend to rename ØMQ to a generic reference of message queuing MQ. In addition to that, why is ØMQ singled out, there are many other similar better or worse libraries that are not mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.133.170.88 (talk) 14:33, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing “pattern” with “process”

I find the usage of “pattern” to be initially confusing. I suggest the usage of “pattern” to be replaced with “process”. The reason being is that although pattern does technically work in this context, I think that defining this as a “process” is more appropriate, particularly because I think it gives a more clear syntax to understanding the initial abstraction. 2601:5CC:C900:7DB0:6908:169F:3DEE:EE95 (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

- There is a software design pattern called "Messaging Pattern" - this article doesn't describe it and instead describes some API protocols. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.235.48 (talk) 19:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]