> If you want to deploy a service into a resource-constained device, you probably don't want to use XML/SOAP/HTTP. (This is a point that Gregg has pointed out repeatedly.)
Anne, We *do* want to use XML/SOAP/HTTP,
precisely for the reason you point out below: using a unique technology base,
which allows to break down technology silos and to readily integrate
device-level services into enterprise scenarios. The latter is extremely
important for industrial environments where build-to-order and mass
customization are becoming the name of the game and where plants have to be
rapidly reconfigurable.
We have experimentally demonstrated that the
Devices Profile for Web Services can be implemented on an ARM9
processor using as little as 512K of ROM and 128K of RAM, yielding response
times below 10 ms. Single-chip network-connected components incorporating such
processor and memory capacity are available today and will soon cost less than
$5, hence you can put them in most every device.
Note further that using HTTP is an option -
whether or not to use it is a matter of policy, as is the use of angle brackets
or of some binary representation.
Harm Smit.
> Obviously it's a good idea to establish some policies regarding technology selection. You don't want every developer to use a different beast -- the system will quickly get chaotic. But at the same time, you really don't want to constrain the choices to just XML/SOAP/HTTP. My general recommendation is that XML/SOAP/HTTP should be the default technology, i.e., use it unless there's a compelling reason not to.
SPONSORED LINKS
| Computer software | Computer aided design software | Computer job |
| Soa | Service-oriented architecture |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
