On 5/22/06, patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > The way I interpret Werner's comments is that if you want to make a
> > service that can be consumed by all constituencies, you should
> > provide a POX interface for people who prefer to use dynamic
> > languages and a WS-* interface for those that prefer to use compiled
> > languages.
> >
> > From: Eric Newcomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > That's pretty consistent with what Amazon folks have been saying for
> > a couple of years now.
>
> And is this a satisfying approach to people on this list? Why or why
> not?

Not for me.  Even if the language was "static", I think it's still
simpler to turn a string (URI) into data (via HTTP GET)- as a Java or
.NET developer would be able to do with java.net or System.Net - than
it would be to call a proprietary getFoo API via SOAP.  Even if the
response were serialized Java objects, I think this would still hold.

Mark.




SPONSORED LINKS
Computer software Computer aided design software Computer job
Soa Service-oriented architecture


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to