W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2001

Re: Announce: A brief history of SOAP

From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 10:18:38 -0800
Message-ID: <1de501c0ba0f$0346eef0$33a1dc40@murphy2>
To: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>, "'Fredrik Lundh'" <fredrik@pythonware.com>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Don doesn't know the difference betw his opinion and fact.

I've given a lot of thought to your pov, now do the return favor.

When I see a layer in software I always ask if I can collapse it, to
simplify the workings of the machine underneath.

Your mind seems to work the other way.

I ask "What flexibility was put there at the beginning that is no longer
needed based on what we know about how people use this?"

This is how you get to usability in all things. I've got a long career
behind me learning that lesson and a lot of credibility in the form of
products that were commercial hits, moneymakers and award-winners. Until
it's simple and efficient no one gets it. Then it can get horribly complex
and yucky, after it gets in. At the beginning it must be easy.

Have you ever stopped to wonder why the SOAP world is perpetually at the
starting gate Don?

Maybe it would be a good idea to stop and think about that.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>
To: "'Fredrik Lundh'" <fredrik@pythonware.com>; "Box, Don"
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: Announce: A brief history of SOAP

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fredrik Lundh [mailto:fredrik@pythonware.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 2:35 AM
> > To: Box, Don
> > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Announce: A brief history of SOAP
> >
> >
> > > You can read it at http://www.develop.com/dbox/postsoap.html
> >
> >     "Does SOAP/XML Messaging make sense without something like
> >     WSDL? No way"
> >
> > huh?  I've got lots of users for my python soap implementation,
> > and now you're saying that what they do doesn't make sense?
> Without a machine-readable metadata format, there are too many
> for misinterpretation, especially when bridging to type systems that have
> strict type system (e.g., Java, .NET, C++/COM, JDBC). This got hashed out
> the SOAP list ages ago.
> > what have we missed?
> In a script-only world, probably nothing. However, for folks who aren't
> using Perl/Python/Tcl etc, the lack of metadata makes all of this XML
> very stone-age.
> I firmly believe that within 12 months, schema compilers will render
> like the DOM and SAX fairly obsolete except for low-level XML wonks. In
> absence of metadata, this just can't happen.
> DB
> http://www.develop.com/dbox
Received on Saturday, 31 March 2001 13:19:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:12 UTC