Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)

[Brendan Macmillan <bren@mail.csse.monash.edu.au>]

> >Has anyone published a point-by-point comparison between CORBA and 
> >SOAP/XML-RPC?

> You could probably consider SOAP and CORBA as complimentary.  SOAP to
> IIOP might be a better comparison.  The three "big" object server models
> out there have been CORBA, EJB, and COM+ -- these three use IIOP, RMI,
> and DCOM respectively as the primary method to pass information to and
> from objects.

This is a useful perspective.  A categorical quibble: RMI seems to be of a
similar sophistication to CORBA, having a naming service, stubs, etc.

Are CORBA and EJB really similar kinds of things?

And perhaps there is usefully a third level, for the marshalling/serialization
tier:
 - SOAP is part method invocation; part XML serialization format.
 - RMI does method invocation (and lots of infrastructure); and uses Java's own
Serialization.

> Now that SOAP is on the scene; CORBA, EJB and COM+ don't go away, they just
> have another way to pass information to and from objects.
BTW: in support of this view, Java has a IIOP-RMI facility to interoperate
with CORBA.

[kasnip]
> So I think of SOAP as being a universal IIOP/RMI/DCOM substitute that mere
> mortals can type by hand.
and read, to diagnose problems...


Cheers,
Brendan
-- 
e:  bren@mail.csse.monash.edu.au                    v:  +61 (3)  9905 1502
Email is checked daily                              Phone is rarely attended