[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>Interesting. Too bad her comment is the equivalent of a sound bite with no substance at all. I'd be curious to know why she things moving to XML from proprietary binary formats is a setback as opposed to a step forward. Maybe this is just Sun's way of justifying pushing replacing the XML in XML Web Services with ASN.1
>
>
Taking the specific remark about SOAP and UDDI, I'd personally agree
with her. The initial buzz around SOAP was all based on the rpc/encoded
use (or Microsoft's "wrapped" variation) where method calls were
"transparently" exposed as web services. Now that that's effectively
deprecated in WS-I BP 1.0 (for good reason) SOAP currently offers very
little (if any) functionality beyond what can be done using direct XML
interchange over HTTP. What *is* interesting in the web services area is
WSDL, but WSDL doesn't require SOAP. And UDDI has always struck me a
solution in search of a problem - I've yet to see any practical
applications that couldn't be handled just as easily with a simple web
page directory of services.
I'd love to be proved wrong on these points, though. It's embarrassing
when I teach web services to be able to show so little benefit from
SOAP, given all the attention it's received. People feel that with so
much marketing hype there has to be more substance than I'm able to
demonstrate.
- Dennis
|
