I don't think your criteria equation is very accurate. Although I agree you can find many examples of coarse grained interfaces on the web (which we can regard as general).
 
I'm using RSS+HTTP as an example of coarse grained interface since I started blogging. A blog could have fine grained interface like: getLastPost, getPrevious, getNext, getAllSince, etc. Instead, you do one GET, you've got many items in the feed, and then you can do whatever you want with them. If there was getNext and similar, the subsequent calls would have to know about each other and bare some contextual information (or even be part of some distributed transactions...).
 
So my criteria, probably also pretty inaccurate, would be around a need for distributed transactions. Coarse-grained interfaced service should have no need for transactional context knowledge... and if there is such a need, then the interface should allow for transactions on the applications level - no middleware!
 
Best,
Radovan
 
On 1/16/06, Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/15/06, Logan, Patrick D < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 'big' components that provide some service relevant to the business
> > domain, use coarse grained interfaces). AFAIK there is not even the
> > idea of making these interfaces as similar as possible to facilitate
> > component integration.
>
> This whole "big components with coarse grained interfaces" is a
> canard.

I'd still like to understand what folks mean by "coarse grained
interface".  I see many people *saying* they're doing them, but when I
look around at what's deployed, all I see are what I would personally
call "fine grained interfaces".  To me, "coarse grained" = "general".

Mark.
--
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.       http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com





YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS






--
Radovan Janecek
http://radovanjanecek.net/blog

SPONSORED LINKS
Service-oriented architecture Computer monitoring software Free computer monitoring software


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to