Gregg Wonderly wrote:
> Eric Newcomer wrote:
> > Our assumption is that the use of XML (and its
> > application in WSDL) promotes choice rather than
> > constrains it. Every language can understand XML. But
> > not every language can understand Java.
>
> The issue is to to make every language understand Java. The issue is that
> Java
This should say "The issue is not to make every language understand Java." And
a point I would add is that making every language understand XML, and more
specifically be ignorant of document changes and non-affected by domain or
range
changes of the content is not a simple road. So, I don't understand how one
can
argue that choosing a single programming language which removes these issues is
any worse than choosing XML so that you can choose any language, and then have
to reimplement document parsing and extraction and mapping code (or buy
multiple
tools to do this for you) for all those languages.
> can be used to bridge a large number of protocols directly. Out of that, you
> have the ability then to choose which protocol you use on your ESB, and more
> importantly, you can use mobile code to distribute to the clients, the
> implementation of the protocol that you want to use today, and tomorrow you
> can
> change that protocol and because of mobile code, the client doesn't know
> anything about what you are doing differently.
>
> The point of Jini with Java is that protocols no longer matter. It's the
> application that's important, and with plugable endpoints you can change it.
> What's different from using web services "only" is that with Java, you can use
> mobile code to make that protocol change/adaptation invisible to the clients.
Gregg Wonderly
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
