I agree completely, Paul. POX is clearly the significant alternative to SOAP, and REST only has as much mindshare as it does because people mistakenly consider any use of XML over HTTP as REST. AFAIK anything that involves URLs with a bunch of parameters at the end is not REST (because it's not identifying a particular resource, it's effectively exposing a method call). Do you disagree with this, Stefan?
I've yet to see any examples of using REST for real service applications. The big problem here is that almost any reasonable service is going to involve coordinated state changes to many different "resources". REST appears incapable of dealing with this type of requirement. - Dennis Paul Fremantle wrote: > Stefan > > My favourite internet Irish tin whistle music website uses SOAP to > link to Google, and Yahoo uses SOAP to power its email client, so I > don't think you can say SOAP on the internet is dead. I give the music > website as an example of a small organisation that isn't "enterprise". > > Anyway, that wasn't my main point! > > It is perhaps a little bit wrong to talk about REST as an option for > a Service Oriented Architecture. Most existing services don't cleanly > map into REST, except those directly backed by a resource model such > as a database. Even a layer of stored procedures over the data is > likely to mean that you cannot map it into REST. > > Really you should be talking about Resource Oriented Architecture (ROA). > > I actually think ROA has a number of attractive aspects, but I don't > think its the solution to everything. I think that a POX (Plain Ole > XML) or SOAP approach is going to be required because not everyone > thinks in a resource oriented way. > > I think its time to call the Rest-ians on their distinctions. There > are plenty of RESTians taking a hard line on what is "REST" and what > isn't, and at the same time willing to say that REST is the only good > solution for an SOA. Well, if you analyze most "services" and SOA they > aren't based on state transitions of resources. Trying to have your > cake and eat it? > > Paul > > On 11/24/06, Stefan Tilkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I agree with the notion that business is more important than IT, and >> many, many IT folks should work to learn a lot more about the actual >> business value and their part (or lack of) in it. >> Whether or not REST vs. WS-* or Java vs. Ruby or C++ vs. Smalltalk or >> Windows vs. Linux vs. OS X is relevant or not depends very much on >> the topic of the discussion we're having. When we're talking about >> business strategies for a telecommunications company, Java vs. Ruby >> doesn't play a big role. That doesn't mean that they're the same — >> even if they're both "just programming languages". >> >> 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> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> I 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 >>> :- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> 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/
