Lists Home |
Date Index |
Mike Champion wrote:
>I guess my question is, "If HTTP is so general, why are vendors such
>as BEA, Tibco, Progress, etc. moving to other protocols to "ensure
>delivery of XML documents" via web services? It's easy to agree with
>Mark Baker (especially after browsing the REST Wiki) that in
>principle HTTP is a 99/1 solution for internet communications, so why
>is the world backing away from this in practice?
I'd suggest that HTTP is fine for most synchronous RPC applications.
IMHO these are likely to be a small and relatively uninteresting subset
of XML ("web") services in the long run, though. The more interesting
ones are services designed to be hooked together and composed into
complex distributed systems, and for these synchronous operation is
Of course, you can still use HTTP for asynchronous messaging - it's
sometimes convenient to avoid problems with firewalls and such - but
it's a design misuse that adds overhead with no appreciable benefits.