On 05/07/06, Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 5, 2006, at 11:20 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
>
> > This is my point, not that REST is rubbish or SOAP rocks, but that the
> > implementation of the execution context is of NO VALUE at all to the
> > business,
>
>
> Well (for example), implementing a system based on RPC style SOAP,
> deploying it and discovering that the inability to cache all those
> zillions of data-getting calls turns out to be prohobitive (which is
> a real life story) vs. implementing it using e.g. REST suggests that
> architecture *does* have an effect that can be felt in the pockets of
> the share holders - eh?
Errr not sure on the specifics of the example obviously, but if you
don't meet your NFRs then you've made an invalid design decision. I'm
not sure why a SOAP approach couldn't cache data getting calls where a
REST one could though.
You are talking about someone failing to meet NFRs, which isn't a new
challenge and certainly not one limited to bad implementations of SOAP
systems.
>
> Jan
>
>
>
>
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/
