If the WSDL-based code generation is well done then such code survives reasonable (backward compatible) interface changes. There is nothing wrong with this - except that the generated code is often bad... ;-)
Radovan
On 5/25/06, patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> use plain old XML for some things and SOAP and WSDL
> for some other things
I have seen in practice several times teams building SOAP and WSDL
solutions where an HTTP and URI approach would have had several more
advantages.
A *big* problem to me is that vendors, et al. promote the WS-*
approach and then people find WSDL-based code generation is so
convenient (at first) that developers don't even *think* about the
HTTP and URI approach and what might be lost or duplicated as a result.
So one response might be "do both". Another response might be "start
with HTTP and URI's. Do something additional or instead if the need
arises."
-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.
