Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: "Mike Champion" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Can you stand yet another SOAP-RPC vs HTTP GET question?
- From: "Dare Obasanjo" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 20:49:16 -0700
- Thread-index: AcHoG9cj0y8MlHzHQwaUnF/luYM7XAAAH6b4
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Can you stand yet another SOAP-RPC vs HTTP GET question?
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:result uri="http://www.25hoursaday.com" > <!-- Perhaps more elements or text here --> </google:result>
<! -- more 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.
From: Mike Champion [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Fri 4/19/2002 8:31 PM
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Can you stand yet another SOAP-RPC vs HTTP GET question?
4/19/2002 11:04:40 PM, Robin Berjon <email@example.com> wrote:
>That rant (or semi-rant, depending on the tone) has been around the net 
>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