On 11/22/06, Anil John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <Nick Gall> > No, it's not better at all, it's significantly worse than at least one > alternative. > </Nick Gall>
That was me, actually. > > With the greatest of respect, I would really prefer to not get drawn > into another of the many, many, many, many, many (...) ongoing SOAP vs > REST/WEB conversations :-) Me neither. Folks can check the archives. > The only point that I wished to make, regardless of how funny I found > Pete's skewering of SOAP (and I found it plenty funny and right on > target), is that there is widespread vendor/user support behind the WS-* > implemenations. Combined with the available tooling support for folks > who wish to take advantage of those implementations, you have > significant amount of momentum AND the ability to build solutions in a > heterogeneous platform/technology/vendor enviornment with WS-* > technologies. Wide spread support and tooling are a *necessary* condition for success, but unfortunately, insufficient. You also need a technical architecture capable of meeting the requirements placed on it, and Web services don't because they're far too tightly coupled. Mark.
