Trouble is that 2 isn't a universal, so I'd say that WS-* can certainly build robust, scalable, adaptable service architecture.
I'm very very confident that SAP, Oracle, IBM, Microsoft et al will produce commercial systems that deliver Web Services, and sure we can all come up with a theoretically better solution, but can we come up with a more commercially compelling one? I don't think so. http://service-architecture.blogspot.com/2006/11/want-to-be-cool-learn-rest-want-career.html The problem isn't the technical standards IMO, its the modelling of the business and what a service should _be_ that is the biggest challenge to successful SOA adoption and implementation. On 23/11/06, Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Three things, amongst a million others, have emerged from discussions over the years on this Group: (1) Web Services are not identical to SOA; (2) Many people with decades of technical experience do not think that WS are up to the job of providing the means to build robust, adaptable and scalable SOA structures that will stand a reasonable test of time; (3) Most of the AppServer/middleware/EAI vendors who have transitioned to being allegedly primarily SOA vendors seem to be basing their offerings at least in significant part on conformance with WS standards. Bearing in mind (1) and (2), what would you suggest that the vendors offer as an alternative to (3)? If you think the people who believe (2) are mistaken, how confident are you that WS will provide a satisfactory foundation for SOA-based development over, say, the next 6 years (allowing for orderly evolution of WS standards)? Gervas
