[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: APIs, messaging
- From: Francis Norton <email@example.com>
- To: Uche Ogbuji <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:50:39 +0100
Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> In my latest Thinking XML column installment I tossed the cryptic barb
> that ebXML's adoption of SOAP could actually prove a defeat for its
> principles of loose-coupling. The tyranny of the SOAP serialization is
> one of the factors behind this observation.
Yes - I flagged your post announcing the columns and if I hadn't been so
busy trying to work out from other specs whether it was just me being
stupid or what, I'd have read them and been enlightened.
<snip>much good stuff</snip>
> > The UDDI Programmer's API 1.0, I notice, specifies that "In version 1 of
> > the UDDI specification, the SOAP encoding feature (section 5) is not
> > supported. Operator Sites will reject any request that arrives with a
> > SOAP encoding attribute."
> Whoa! I missed this, and I'm quite surprised, I must say. Maybe there is
> hope... Gotta go research.
No hope. Absolute certainty. Life's too short for coding, re-coding,
re-deploying and re-testing comms interfaces. If the document's
schema-valid, then it's valid enough for the interface.
The document *is* the message.