[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 15:23:43 -0500, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
> the other necessary condition is
> that what's agreed upon actually works at scale. IMO, Web services
> don't; they're not late bound, like every other successful system on
> the Internet today.
Hmmm ...In what sense is something like Amazon.com or eBay.com "late bound"
if you look beyond the human interaction part of it (e.g., the human
scrolling through a list of query results and looking for something to buy
or bid on)? And in what sense are the HTML forms and POSTS on the client
side and the CGI/JSP/ASP stuff on the client side *conceptually* different
than Web services? As a thought experiment, consider if one of these sites
used client side code (maybe employing XForms) to generate a SOAP message
from the user input rather than simply POSTing name-value pairs, and the
server side extracted the information it needed out of the XML body rather
than out of the HTTP parameters. What is REALLY different between "Web
services" and the successful systems on the Internet that invoke
significant server-side processing rather than simply moving
representations around?
Unless you tightly couple the client-side code to the actual objects and
methods that are ultimately invoked on the server side (something that
virtually everyone I know of agrees is foolish!) then the SOAP/XML approach
seems architecturally more or less the same as the HTML/CGI approach. What
is different is simply that more of the nuts and bolts are standardized
using XML, as I see it anyway.
|
