Lists Home |
Date Index |
4/25/2002 12:42:15 PM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>The danger is not REST or SOAP and RPC. It is continuing a
>fracas so contentious that work on specs just about to be
>ready stops or is slowed to the point that other organizations
>are forced or delighted to step in and seize the day.
Uhh, that's not a danger, that's the reality we live in. "Web" services
don't appear to leverage a big part of the web. REST is supposedly
what we all do without knowing it, but developers think they
want to access the web with the same tools that they use to
access local drives and LANs. The work on the specs is getting
"interesting" because people have to reboot their brains every time
they try to sort out the inconsistencies here.
[The "web services blue screen of brain death", maybe?]
I know I feel like I live half my life in one world and
half in the other, and I cope by not worrying too much about
the inconsistencies (and, hopefully, applying whichever approach
is best for the particular job at hand).
It may end up being like the 200-year-old (?) question of whether
light is a wave or a particle. It's both, neither, or some transcendent thingie
that we can't imagine that has both aspects, and people have
just learned when to think one way and when to think the other.
But the CLEARLY WRONG answer, either for 19th century physics or for
the 21st century internet, would be to try to enforce one
view or the other in the name of stopping a contentious fracas.
We obviously can't stop work until we understand the "transcendent
thingie" with both SOAP and RPC aspects, and we can't afford to
answer the question by fiat. Figuring out when one works better
than the other seems like the right approach to me ... while searching
for transcendent thingie enlightenment in our spare time.