[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Did you get anyone defending SOAP on its technical merits?
You and Mark Baker seem to present more technical defense than any of
the "advocates", which has me thoroughly confused.
(Don Box did bring up a common framing format[1], but I'm having a hard
time seeing the format mitigating the overall approach.)
On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 18:45, Paul Prescod wrote:
> Here are the major categories of responses I've gotten to the article:
>
> * "Performance doesn't matter dummy" -- as if I didn't say in the
> article: "performance is a minor issue compared to linking." -- Joel is
> a stand-out because he said performance DOES matter -- for Google if not
> for the rest of us.
>
> * "It's all just syntax -- it doesn't matter" -- as if I didn't show
> things that could be done with the HTTP-way but *not with* the SOAP way.
>
> * "The big companies have chosen. Alternate views at this point are
> just confusion." -- that would be fine if the technique that the big
> companies have chosen weren't fundamentally bankrupt.
>
> * "It's the tools dummy" -- as if I didn't show that the .NET Framework
> (i.e. Visual Studio) has *quite good support* for HTTP-based web
> services.
[1] - http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200204/msg00770.html
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
