> On 5/24/06, Gregg Wonderly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mark Baker wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > Okay Mark, so my question is, why would a developer even care what
> > transport/transfer protocol was used? In the end, isn't it only the data that
> > goes and the data that returns which matters to the developer? Do they care
> > about how the two devices interact with each other? At deployment time, someone
> > will probably care to make the right things talk to the right places. But, as a
> > developer, do I really care?
>
> No, of course not. As Werner said, developers want the simplest way
> possible to do something. What Werner doesn't appear to acknowledge
> though, is that the architectural style impacts the simplicity.
>
> When it comes down to it, a Web services solution will always be more
> complex because it requires the developer to know more things ("more
> moving parts" as Patrick says). If the developer wants data, then the
> choice is between requiring them to a) have an identifier for the
> service and understand the meaning of the getFoo operation, or b) have
> an identifier for the service. I think it goes without saying that b)
> is simpler for all values of "Foo".
I think that's kind of a sweeping statement. The question is, is it easier to
carry around a 'service-access' object and ask for a Foo, a Bar, a Goog and a
Bek, or is it easier to 'know' all, store and manage all the pieces of
information about these things that will allow me to get them, and understand them.
For a single URL, typed into a browser, it's easy to feel empowered by the
interface.
> So, insofar as HTTP-as-transfer-protocol enables b) to happen, while
> HTTP-as-transport does not, I think the distinction matters. Greatly.
I thought HTTP was a transfer protocol? Why do you mention transport?
Gregg Wonderly
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.
