Lists Home |
Date Index |
6/7/2002 12:47:20 PM, Paul Prescod <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>Can I quote you on that? I'm finding it hard to find people who are
>still in the RPC camp. So far I have Dave Winer and you.
See the (fascinatingly named) "D-AR003.1" thread on
featuring Mark Baker on the side of Truth and moi on the
side of Evil :~). Seriously, for integrating applications
over protocols other than HTTP (e.g., IBM MQ Series, which is
extremely pervasive in back offices of the Real World) it
just makes an awful lot of pragmatic sense to use SOAP
for "data-style" integration, if not necessarily RPC.
I think it came down to a certain
grudging agreement -- there is a lot of SOAP RPC going
on "behind the firewall" for app integration and EDI-like
B2B messaging, but there is considerable reason to believe
that RPC is not a great model for web services over the public
The seeming consensus in TAG, W3C XMLP and W3C
WS-ARCH is that the SOAP community needs to move in the
direction of understanding REST, tweaking the specs to
enable and promote RESTful message exchange patterns where
appropriate ... but not to deprecate RPC.
What the W3C, collectively, has done is to level the
playing field so that SOAP and RPC can compete on an equal
basis for the hearts and minds of real developers.
It's quite possible (likely, in my personal opinion) that the
"RPC Camp" will be whittled down by natural selection, but
it won't be whittled down by TAG finding, the SOAP 1.2 spec,
or the WS Architecture documents per se.
[not speaking for my employer or any of the W3C activities in
which I participate, of course!]