Similarly, I refuse to agree with the assertion that when I look at the technical, architectural properties of a system landscape, it doesn’t matter whether its architecture is built around DCOM/MTS, J2EE, WS-* or REST.
But that’s all beside Steve's original point, which IIRC was “even if it’s cool, it doesn’t matter because the vendors don’t do it”. I disagree: Witness the inclusion of (admittedly bad) REST support in Indigo/WCF and Axis2, or the Systinet 2 repository’s REST interface, or the fact that Google’s Nelson Minar now asserts he’d never choose SOAP and WSDL over REST again … on the Internet, it seems to me that SOAP/WSDL has clearly lost, and this does not bode well for its future in the enterprise.
I will continue to help build good WS-based architectures — I’m not as principled as Mark Baker :-) Whenever I can get someone to listen, I will try to convince them of the REST alternative, though, and I expect this to get easier over the course of the next few years.
Stefan -- Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/ On Nov 24, 2006, at 4:55 PM, Anil John wrote:
<SteveJones>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.</SteveJones> +1I would add, if Steve does not already have it as part of his interpretation of modeling the business, that semantic understanding and agreement on the information that the business is working with, as well the cultural/organizational aspects are also a critical challenges to SOA adoption and implemenation.Regards, - Anil :- :- Anil John :- http://www.aniltj.com/blog :-
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
