[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
My experience has been that many interop problems are a result of various stacks (ours included) trying to mask the existence of XML altogether. That combined with a WSDL specification (1.1) that invented far more than it needed to has made life harder than would otherwise be necessary.
There are (at least) two things that give me hope on this front:
1) WS-I Basic Profile has been deprecating many of the less architecturally sound features of WSDL (and to a lesser degree SOAP and UDDI).
2) The community at large is waking up to the fact that XML is a data model to be embraced, not a weird syntax to be hidden below layer upon layer of goop.
As for UDDI, think of it as an RDF-esque version of LDAP over SOAP. That is the sweet spot for UDDI, not running some Internet-wide registry of stock tickers and celsius/farenheit converters.
DB
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Graham [mailto:igraham@ic-unix.ic.utoronto.ca]
Sent: Fri 2/7/2003 5:35 PM
To: James Governor
Cc: Owen Walcher; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] web services stack
My own experience is that UDDI is also premature .... it works, but has
bugs and is not 99.99999% reliable.
Similarly, my experience is that Web services toolsets are not terribly
interoperable -- you can write a WSDL / XSD schema to define a service,
but then spend an enormous amount of time working through the
incompatibilities/poor optimizations of the varous service implementations
(Axis, .NET, etc.) I Ian
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, James Governor wrote:
> Do you know many examples of firms actually using UDDI in this way? Of
> course orgs are using web services technology behind the firewall--that
> is something they are good at. You say UDDI is "a great way to manage
> the multitude of web services"--we have not seen many organizations
> actually doing that yet. Is your experience different? I'd love to hear
> more.
>
>
>
> James Governor
> RedMonk
> (+44) 207 254 7371
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen Walcher [mailto:news@owenwalcher.com]
> Sent: 05 February 2003 17:35
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] web services stack
>
> >I would qualify the presence of UDDI -- "free love" on the business
> internet is a long way off. Security doesn't begin to cover trust, and
> that's far more important for business transactions.
>
> Do not discount UDDI. Many organizations are building web services,
> BEHIND
> their firewalls. UDDI is a great way to manage the multitude of web
> services
> created by every little group within an organization, facilitating reuse
> in
> a way unlike anything I have seen or heard of (like a reuse czar or code
> librarian without the bodies and politics!). All it takes is a little
> practice to see what wheels already exist, before rewriting them again.
> And
> of course, that is one of the reasons for a web services model in the
> first
> place.
>
> Owen
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
