[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
5/3/2002 9:49:20 AM, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com> wrote:
>I guess I follow too many lists and weblogs. I see the debate being
>conducted everywhere, and have to admit a frequent desire for the WS
>people to take their toys and go elsewhere if they don't like how
>they're being received. I've said elsewhere that the WS community and
>the XML community have very different values, and I'm not convinced
>they're compatible.
It's precisely the question of how compatible they really area that
makes it worth discussing on xml-dev, IMHO. Yes, the debate is
conducted everywhere, but even some very knowledgeable people
who haven't been exposed to the level of discussion here don't
seem to "get it" -- The REST vs RPC debate isn't about GET vs POST,
or scripting vs typed languages, or doing by hand vs using a Visual
programming tool, or SOAP vs generic XML .... it's about
identifying services by their URI so that they are REALLY part of the Web.
I honestly don't think that message has come across in the numerous
lists and weblogs as well as it has here. True, that's only tangentially
related to XML in reality, but much of the world seems to think
web services are the only thing XML has to offer, so the
counter arguments need to be prepared and sharpened.
>
>Infomation Items are still a layer or twelve closer to markup than RPC
>calls. They may be contributing to the decline of civilization as we
>know it [ducking], but it's awfully hard to argue that they aren't
>relevant.
Right ... there is a lot more commonality within the various flavors of the
"XML and/or Infoset as generic resource representation for the Web"
view than there is between this view and the "XML and the Web are generic middleware
for moving serialized objects between applications" view.
|
