Eric, Steve, Jan, Thanks for correcting me. Steve, though I am certain I read some documentation implying what I had posted, I will do some more research into the topic.
Thanks again Cheers G --- In [email protected], Eric Newcomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gautham, > > The question of why CORBA is considered legacy (it did not fail, it remains in production in many mission critical applications today) has been debated at length in this forum. > > The short summary is that CORBA was developed before Java and the Web came along, and basically it did not adapt itself to those new technology communities either quickly or well enough. > > Eric > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Gautham Kasinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:28:24 AM > Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: WebServices to repeat CORBA's mistakes : "The Rise and Fall of CORBA" > > > Hey there, > Well, I was confused by the line: "Well, it tells us that HTTP is a > higher level "thing" than RMI, IIOP," > How do you define the "thing"? > IMHO, HTTP is only a transport. Hence in the grand design of Service > Oriented Architecture (of which Web Services may be a means), HTTP > plays a very insignificant role. > > CORBA however, was a separate paradigm in computing, IMHO. I guess it > was mostly the open sources answer to D-COM. However, I am unclear > about the causes of its failure. I Will need to explore that avenue. > > Cheers > G > > --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, "Mark Baker" > <distobj@ > wrote: > > > > On 6/28/06, Gregg Wonderly <gergg@> wrote: > > > Mark Baker wrote: > > > > On 6/28/06, Gregg Wonderly <gergg@> wrote: > > > > > > > >>Humm, but it has been said here that HTTP is an application > layer protocol. The > > > >>semantics of INVOKE are well defined. A remote reference is > indicated in the > > > >>payload which is the service as a URI is in HTTP. The > parameters of the method > > > >>call are arbitrary, but particular to the service, just like the > payload of POST > > > >>or PUT. The INVOKE always returns a reply as HTTP does. Help > me understand > > > >>what is not uniform about that? > > > > > > > > You have to INVOKE an operation. That operation is the application > > > > layer semantic. > > > > > > Right, and with HTTP, the message layer semantics that transpire > based on you > > > invoking a HTTP operation are at the same level as the eventual method > > > invocation on the remote end of an RMI INVOKE operation. > > > > That seems right, though it's possible that we might disagree about > > the meaning of "message layer semantics" and "eventual method > > invocation". > > > > In both cases, remote, application layer operations are being invoked > > over a network. > > > > > There are no real > > > differentiating factors other than nomenclature here are there? > > > > Well, it tells us that HTTP is a higher level "thing" than RMI, IIOP, > > or how SOAP is commonly used, because it provides the operations being > > invoked while the others do not. Considering how the entire Web > > services architecture is premised on it being a lower level thing, I > > think that's significant. > > > > Mark. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/2pRQfA/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/NhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
