Re: APIs, messaging

[Francis Norton <francis@redrice.com>]

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. 

Francis.