Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:32:11 -0500, Joe Gregorio <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Mu. REST is a protocol, SOAP is a message format. <duck>
> REST is an architectural style, SOAP is a message format.
You're right of course. SOA is also an architectural style.
I *think* the whole SOAP vs REST permathread comes down to
Resource-orientation vs Service-orientation ... complicated by the
fact that services are also resources, and services can be invoked by
HTTP+XML just fine. Joe's
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/03/02/restful.html is the clearest I've
ever seen on what "resource orientation" means :
" we need to answer our four questions.
1. What are the resources?
2. What are the representations?
3. What methods are supported at each resource?
4. What status codes could be returned?"
I can't point to an equally concise definition of SOA, perhaps something like:
1. What are the services?
2. What are the the service contracts (interfaces) to invoke the servces?
3. What quality of service is required in a real business situation?
4. What technologies can be feasibly applied to meet those QoS requirements?"
In *both* REST and SOA there is a very large hairy wookie of an
unanswered question screeching for attention: What are the semantics
of the resources / services? In practice this is handled explicitly
or implicitly by human understanding in both styles. In theory both
could be handled by some sort of formal semantic mapping a la the