Stefan Tilkov wrote: > On Dec 7, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Gregg Wonderly wrote: > > Stefan Tilkov wrote: > > > Bullshit. JAX-WS is as RPC-centric as the JAX-RPC/JAXM combination. > > > > Depending on what you transport and how the interface is described, RPC is > > equivalent to messaging. The standing issue for interoperability is a > common, > > known wire protocol. Maybe you can elaborate on the rift that you > > perceive? > > RPC hides the fact that you're sending a message over a network, and > tries (but fails) to create the illusion of a "remote method call". > JAX-RPC basically treats the fact that you're sending XML messages > over a net as an implementation detail. JAXM didn't, but > unfortunately was (semi-officially) retired. > > JAX-WS is 90% RPC, with a little messaging integrated - but any JAX- > WS compliant implementation will have to support all of the RPC madness.
I guess this still doesn't help me understand. From a programatic interface, in Java, if I can call a method and that method call results in using WS to send a SOAP message, that seems like a fine thing to me. From the RMI programming model, it should also throw RemoteException or IOException or something to indicate a failure to connect and transfer the message. I don't care about the wire protocol practically in my software. Only for deployment/wiring would I actually need to know what was expected/provided by the service right? Gregg Wonderly
