On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 17:20 +0100, Steve Jones wrote: > > With OO the language was of secondary importance to the philiosphical > shift that OO represented. So it should be with SOA, but as with OO > we become obsessed with the technology and ignore the mental shift, > mainly because software vendors and developers find it very hard to > sell mental shifts whereas they can sell any TLA as "10% whiter than > the previous brand of Sudsy".
I agree with you, but technology exists to make life easier for people. While it is possible to design an SOA with pigeons carrying messages written on slates, that's much harder to do than something else. So the question really should be not whether its possible to X with Y (which of course is as long as the underlying languages are Turing complete) but rather what is the best technology for implementing SOAs. Despite all the discussion about alternatives such as HTTP/Jini/CORBA, I'm still convinced that WS-* is the best technology *available today* to implement SOAs that do real "enterprisey" stuff. Of course I'm not an unbiased observer! Sanjiva. ------------------------ 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/
