RE: [xml-dev] Can you stand yet another SOAP-RPC vs HTTP GET question?

["Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>]

That comment on the weblog is blinded by "shiny new things" technology. Google could still give people pre-digested XML data as you call it without going through the hoopla of SOAP and WSDL by simply providing a schema for the XML results returned by a query. 
 
If Google returned 
 
<google:results xmlns:google="xmlns://google.com/2002/searchAPI" 
                         xmlns:xsi=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance 
           xsi:schemaLocation=http://www.google.com/xml/searchResults.xsd>
 
  <google:result uri="http://www.25hoursaday.com"; > <!-- Perhaps more elements or text here -->  </google:result>
 
<! -- more results --> 
 
</google:results>
 
from a HTTP GET for http://www.google.com/xml?q=Dare+Obasanjo then nothing stops me from using Data Binding technologies in my language of choice (Yaay C#, Yaay Java, Yaay Perl) to "pre-digest" this data into objects since I have a schema for it. Plus, I have the benefit of still seeing the raw XML for my data whenever I'd like to. 
 
Basically, I'm terribly unimpressed by the Google API. I hope this isn't what people consider the point of SOAP and webservices because if so then they are fooling themselves greatly.  
 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org] 
Sent: Fri 4/19/2002 8:31 PM 
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org; robin@knowscape.com 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Can you stand yet another SOAP-RPC vs HTTP GET question?



	4/19/2002 11:04:40 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@knowscape.com> wrote:
	
	>
	>That rant (or semi-rant, depending on the tone) has been around the net [1]
	>for a few days and imho isn't about to stop too soon as more widely visible
	>web services appear.
	
	Hmm, one comment on that weblog may say it all: "There's one significant
	difference between Google's XML results and Google's SOAP API: the
	XML results gave you a document and left you on your own; the SOAP
	API gives you pre-digested data structures."
	
	"Pre-digested" being the operative word, and very much in the spirit of Robin's
	reply.  Oh well, I've lost my mind, but I still have my teeth, so I guess
	I'll stick with the old folks' way a bit longer.
	
	>I'm not denigrating anyone, and in fact this approach could be better in the
	>very same way that some languages are sometimes considered better because
	>they let you do less.
	
	I for one don't mind the option (or even the default) of getting the data back
	pre-digested into data structures, lists, tuples, or whatever the native language
	idiom happens to be. I do mind a) having to mutter a bunch of gibberish to get the data and
	b) not having the option of seeing the response in its raw XML (SOAP is fine!) format.
	
	
	
	
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>