- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:32:20 -0500
- To: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hi Anne, On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:54:48AM -0500, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > That's not O(N^2) complexity. It's not O(N^2) as long as you're only integrating insurance systems with one another using the same WSDL. As soon as you step outside of insurance, such as if you wanted to integrate banking, CRM, etc.. it's O(N^2) because each new system added (that doesn't have an interface that you've already integrated to), requires new integration work. If you don't buy that argument, would you agree that having less interfaces means easier integration? i.e. that it's easier if all the insurance companies agree on a standard interface than it would be if they didn't? If so, would you also agree that if banking and CRM companies could agree to wrap themselves in the same interface, that this would further reduce integration costs? And if yes to that, then wouldn't the ultimate interface be one that could wrap all systems? MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Will distribute objects for food
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 09:28:47 UTC