Hi Mark,
I think your preference is also very well known ;-)
As you may know, we have a customer using CORBA IDL to describe Websphere MQ messages and to generate EJBs. So clearly there's more than one way to separate interface from implementation.
I completely agree that the Web is a wonderful thing - a tremendous success beyond anyone's imagination, and certainly the world's largest distributed application. And actually we at IONA believe that it's good practice to build up your SOA infrastructure in a very similar way, using a distributed endpoint oriented approach.
But the point is not "when did you stop loving the Web" or even "when did you say that the Web isn't great" but how more than one person can be right at the same time. Because in the end what we are taking about is a matter of opinion and preference, since there are multiple possible ways to accomplish the same thing. I know very well how convinced you are that your approach is better. This is not at all the point.
To me the difference is that I also have a preference, which is that you use plain old XML for some things and SOAP and WSDL for some other things and that you can combine these things together to solve a greater variety of problems more easily than if you only used one or the other. When you disagree with me you try to force a choice for your preference. That's ok, but my preference is not to do so. I am sorry if you can't agree but I am not going to try to convince you otherwise.
Eric
----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:15:23 AM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: an SOA in practice
On 5/24/06, Eric Newcomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The point is not satisfying or not - it is not a "one size fits all world." As Mark points out he prefers one way. Others prefer another. You can argue endlessly (as people have, do, and will) about whether one preference is "right" or "better" somehow than another, or you can just be practical, like Amazon (apparently at least) and provide both.
I hope you didn't mean to imply that seeking out a "better" solution
isn't practical, Eric! 8-O
The Web provides for more loosely coupled services than does "Web
services", because, as we've discussed before here, the Web cleanly
separates interface from implementation. If loose coupling is
important to you, then it seems the Web *is* probably "better".
Cheers,
Mark.
----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:15:23 AM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: an SOA in practice
On 5/24/06, Eric Newcomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The point is not satisfying or not - it is not a "one size fits all world." As Mark points out he prefers one way. Others prefer another. You can argue endlessly (as people have, do, and will) about whether one preference is "right" or "better" somehow than another, or you can just be practical, like Amazon (apparently at least) and provide both.
I hope you didn't mean to imply that seeking out a "better" solution
isn't practical, Eric! 8-O
The Web provides for more loosely coupled services than does "Web
services", because, as we've discussed before here, the Web cleanly
separates interface from implementation. If loose coupling is
important to you, then it seems the Web *is* probably "better".
Cheers,
Mark.
SPONSORED LINKS
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.
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.
