This is where I see the significant difference - WSDL tells you how. Unfortunatelly, even WSDL 2.0 seems to be not good enough for HTTP services.
Radovan
On 5/24/06,
patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's take feed readers as trivial (hope not too trivial) example:
> these readers have to understand rss 0.91, 1.0, 2.0, atom at least.
I've seen the same thing with SOAP / WSDL. One large vendor's
consultant had to send me a document explaining how to hand-edit their
WSDL to get some other large vendor's tools to consume it.
On the other hand within an oganization, the policy could be to
restrict custom-built systems to use Atom. For example, all newly
built systems would be required to use the Atom format for
logging. Then more specific policies could be defined about the
required and optional elements that a "log" entry should have beyond
the general Atom entry elements.
I don't see how any of this is significantly different in the HTTP /
XMPP world than in the SOAP / WSDL / WS-* world. Except that there
appears to be a good bit more leverage in the HTTP world with
existing, standard, and more widely adopted capabilities.
-Patrick
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 .
--
Radovan Janecek
http://radovanjanecek.net/blog
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.
