On 12 Feb 2003 21:09:26 PST, the world broke into rejoicing as Dave Peticolas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Not that I am advocating SOAP, or any other method, but this > is a misleading statement. You might as well say 'If we go > with CORBA, I'd be left writing the CORBA messages by > hand'. Of course, no one would do that since you could > use a CORBA library to do that for you. And that is precisely > what you would do with SOAP. There are several free SOAP > libraries available, for different languages.
SOAP has the significant downside that interoperability is somewhat, um, spotty, where there are multiple "camps" (specifically: IBM versus Microsoft) which construct messages significantly differently. It's kind of like the old big-endian versus little-endian thing. If you want a /simple/ substrate that uses XML, I'd commend XML-RPC instead, as the spec is only about 2 pages long and there /hasn't/ been the same political infighting over who will dominate the industry using it. But the fact that CORBA actually has a way of declaring how to connect it to different languages is a big advantage. SOAP? Heh. There's /no/ hope of changing implementations and having your code even faintly survive... -- If this was helpful, <http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne> rate me http://cbbrowne.com/info/wp.html Mail should be at least a mixture of upper and lower case. Devising your own font (Devanagari, pinhead graphics, etc.) and using it in the mail is a good entertainment tactic, as is finding some way to use existing obscure fonts. -- from the Symbolics Guidelines for Sending Mail _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
