W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2004

Re: XML protocol comparisons

From: Patrick Steer <webmaster@die-werbung.de>
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 10:48:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <40E6C71F.3060205@die-werbung.de>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org

I put together a comparison of a bunch of XML protocols, SOAP
 [http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#SOAP] ICE 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#ICE] WDDX 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#WDDX] BizTalk 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#BizTalk] IOTP 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#IOTP] TIP 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#TIP] WfXML 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#WfXML] ebXML 
[http://www.w3.org/2000/03/29-XML-protocol-matrix#ebXML] XMI 

 for everyone to discuss/dispute. It is said that the best way to get a 
question answered on usenet is to post an incorrect answer. Persuant to 
that, I have not done extensive readings of some of the protocol papers 
during my characterizations, but at least they're all there in a forum 
where we can compare apples and fruit baskets. I'll be adding more 
dimensions and would like feedback on what people wish to compare. Also, 
I'd like to have anchor-rich HTML versions of the documents so I can 
point to specific parts of the spec as supporting evidence.
Received on Monday, 5 July 2004 15:24:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:26 UTC