Lists Home |
Date Index |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Uche Ogbuji" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > And often - this is a heretic opinion here - I would prefer
> > DCOM or CORBA over XML for client/middle tier interaction,
> > simply because XML/SOAP imposes a rather simple communication
> > model, unless one is willing to re-invent CORBA based on XML.
> I think you'll find this is only heresy among the punditeratti. I've been
> working tentatively with SOAP for a long time, and yet for real world tasks I
> am more likely to
> 1) Use CORBA (If XML messages are required, simple XML text exchange over
> CORBA rules, and it's blazingly fast)
Especially when you use Expat at the end of the pipe. ;-)
> 2) Use XML-RPC (mostly for quick hacks)
> 3) Roll my own (which I always *hate* doing, but sometimes you just can't get
> around highly specialized needs)
Or the comm protocol is a given.
We have a vendor who we interface with using XML over sockets.
No choice on our side about the sockets, the only wish
we got granted was the use of XML (but in the vendors own DTD).
> I haven't yet come across a class of situations for which I would generally
> tend to prefer SOAP. I expect this will change as the infrastructure
> technologies and the WS stack mature.
What is it that prevented CORBA from gaining more ground in the market?
The fact that there is no standardized way to get through firewalls?
I know it was discussed here, but I didn't quite see one
explanation emerging as the one everbody would agree to.