Lists Home |
Date Index |
composable namespaces does not ensure that the
implementations work. On the other hand, as I read the
document Dare gave us to reference, it should be easy
find out when they don't. To the tool users, all of these
services should be drag and drop items. The namespace
designers design according to the data being exchanged,
the implementations. The reason for some of the
complex WS specs is to provide assurances that
works blindly. How does a developer screw that
can't tell what goes on in the minds of developers doing
implementing. I guess if they detest each other as
as some of the mail suggests, you might be right,
so, they need to be laid off if they implement with
attitudes, and their work sent elsewhere. I don't
if someone detests his web mate; I mind a great
if they don't do the job they are paid to do.
are a pack of dogs? Ok.
But, that is why
WS registrars will vette code in accordance
with compliance and conformance test suites, and no
specification becomes a standard without one, and any
developer using unvetted web resources gets fired. Wow.
sure seems easier to mend fences and work together.
I don't think all of
these WS-* specs
I don't think the BIMers
care two hoots if their specs work
with those from the
SOFties. Actually i sometimes think
they'd prefer it if they
don't think so. If this is a composable set of specifications,
is a matter of the programmer not paving their own roads to
by putting together components that don't work. So the
profiles bear watching.
coarse a loosely coupled chunk work? In other words,
combinations are failure prone? Those will be questions
ask. We can make complex things work if they are composed
simpler things that work. Otherwise ALL of our cars would be
"unsafe at any speed".
a couple of years ago i
sat down to read a 130+ page
which had the
gall to quote "Occam's Razor"
as its design ethos.
It's a case of