Re: SOAP and Cacheability

On 19 April 2011 16:56, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote:
> My impression is that the major vendors aren't doing a whole lot to enhance
> their SOAP stacks at this point, but I could be wrong about that. More to
> the point, they seem not to have been convinced that the RESTful variant was
> worth the trouble then, and since then there's been a lot of deployment that
> just uses POST.
>
> Frankly, I think a lot of the use cases where one might have considered use
> of RESTful SOAP are now JSON, and I'd be disinclined to fight that trend.
> The pros and cons are ultimately somewhat subtle in principle (e.g.
> documents vs. just data), but in practice this is where everyone is going,
> and mostly works, and for the data-only cases it's convenient. So, I'm
> doubtful much is going to happen on the SOAP side.

Thanks, that lines up with my impression too, but I don't follow SOAP
so closely. A lot of the noise and excitement has moved on elsewhere,
but there must still be a lot of SOAP around... ...not to mentions
lessons to be learned.

One reason to ask is that in the new RDF WG we have a chartered
deliverable around JSON (http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON)
and it's reminding me of the discussions from a while back around SOAP
Encoding, since both that and JSON provide a kind of quick and
convenient way of dumping and restoring programmatic objects without a
formal schema. Some of the same issues crop up: if Web services are
using JSON (or SOAP encoding) to talk to each other, how are those
structures best defined and documented?

But I'm offtopic from the original query. Nice to see some traffic on
xml-dist-app though, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/
plots the rise and fall of discussions -- things were last in double
figures monthly in July 2007...

cheers,

Dan

Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 15:07:15 UTC