I guess it depends on the semantics of object v service. Personally I've always thought that an object was a "thing" and a service was "what we do", now in Java you might implement them both as "objects" but their semantics are different. A service is an object that has grown up and got some more responsibilities :)
On 08/02/07, Gregg Wonderly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eric Newcomer wrote: > Obviously someone who can't give up objects in favor of services. Humm, does that mean that a service can never be an object, but must be multiple objects or multiple of something? I agree that all "services" in an SOA may not be software services, but for software based services, what makes it bad for them to be objects in implementation? Gregg Wonderly
