Re: [service-orientated-architecture] ROA is not SOA - (was Alternatives to WS Standards)

[Stefan Tilkov]

On Nov 24, 2006, at 9:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:

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.

Again, I'm unsure what definition of POX you're using here - POX can be RESTful or not.

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?

Absolutely, yes - that's why Axis2's REST support is in fact nothing of the sort.

I've yet to see any examples of using REST for real service

is going to involve coordinated state changes to many different
"resources". REST appears incapable of dealing with this type of
requirement.

applications. The big problem here is that almost any reasonable service

Stefan
--
Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/

That's funny because I actually believe that's pretty much what it's built and being used for :-)

  - 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


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.



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

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:

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". Really you should be talking about Resource Oriented Architecture (ROA). solution for an SOA. Well, if you analyze most "services" and SOA they

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.

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.


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

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:

Whether or not REST vs. WS-* or Java vs. Ruby or C++ vs. Smalltalk or But that's all beside Steve's original point, which IIRC was "even if as principled as Mark Baker :-) Whenever I can get someone to listen,

<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


[EMAIL PROTECTED]

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature