Re: Counting noses on "is SOAP and/or WSDL intrinsic to the definition of Web service"

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 07:20:08AM -0600, Champion, Mike wrote:
> I'm happy to say something in the WSA document that genuflects over "plain
> XML over HTTP" to blesses it as a "web service" design pattern for those who
> have application-defined syntaxes and don't need reliable messaging,
> correlation, choreography, security, late binding, etc.

Vanilla "open interface SOA" Web services don't give you any of that
stuff either.  It is only through the principled application of
additional constraints that new properties/features, such as those you
mention, are realized.

There are extensions that can be applied to RESTful systems, and to REST
itself, that can give you those things too (modulo those that you
already have, like late binding and choreography - but I'll ignore them
for the purposes of this discussion).

I don't have much of an opinion on the objectives of this thread (Mu!),
but I want to ensure that REST and the Web are accurately represented.
So I would hope that we can avoid using adjectives such as "basic", as
this suggests (to me, at least) that these types of services are somehow
less capable.  I don't see why we can't just present them as two
different ways of doing the same thing.

Thanks.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

Received on Sunday, 8 June 2003 22:46:03 UTC