Re: SOAP Binding Framework Concerns

Nicely put.

+1

Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote:

> Marwah Sabbouh writes:
> 
> 
>>>It seems to me that the SOAP application 
>>>programmer still needs ( and wants) to specify the protocol
>>>he needs to use.
>>>
> 
> Perhaps this is the essence of the disagreement.  When I write a program 
> to read a file, I typically don't know at the time I write and compile the 
> program whether I will read from a hard drive or a floppy, NTFS vs. FAT or 
> whatever.   Of course, when I run the program, it will be one or the 
> other.  Indeed, sometimes the same program on Unix can read from a socket, 
> pipe or tape drive too.  The general notions of Open/Close/Read/Write are 
> analagous to our binding framework:  they state what's common across all 
> these diverse data management systems.
> 
> The mechanisms of the binding framework allow a similar and very important 
> late coupling for SOAP applications.  With respect, I claim that in many 
> cases I do _not_ want to hard code knowledge of the transport into my 
> application business logic.  I want to say:  "send this envelope as a soap 
> request, using whatever transport is appropriate." 
> 
> I expect that some middleware, not specified in SOAP, but very possibly 
> some combination of UDDI and WSDL will allow me at deployment time or 
> runtime (long after the application is coded and compiled) to figure out 
> which transport each of my partners is using.  So, I might use 
> Request/Resp over http to reach some partners, and Request/Resp over 
> MQSeries to reach those with whom I have set up such a link.  I do _NOT_ 
> want to recode my application when switching from one supplier to another: 
>  I expect Request/Resp to look the same over both, and I expect middleware 
> to make the transport binding switch for me, just as the OS and filesystem 
> know whether to go to the floppy or the harddrive. 
> 
> I think this flexibility is powerful and important in practice.  I can see 
> why, if you are not interested in these scenarios, the binding framework 
> would be of less use.  Some of us very much want to build applications in 
> this manner and therefore look to the binding framework to provide the 
> coordination across bindings.  I hope this makes sense.  Thank you.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
> Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 26 October 2001 10:35:07 UTC