I'm not so sure about that. Business Services may not suite REST that well and with SAP and Oracle already having a lot of WS-* available (and the 1,000s of already successful elements using WS-*) this will continue to be predominant.
The point for me is that there are different types of services some (especially those in the interaction space) are probably best served by a REST type approach. Those in the optimisation or transactional spaces are probably best served by a WS-* approach. The important bit for me is that what we need is to clearly understand how RIA (a presentation approach) will interact with users and how that interaction will be finally represented as transactions in the business. This isn't a single unified stack, its about how the network of services in the business can be leveraged. For me there is no RIA or Mashups at a large scale unless there is effective SOA in the enterprise. It doesn't overly matter how those services are implemented as long as they represent strong business services which can be combined in the way that the business needs. Steve On 25/03/2008, Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > RIA and mashups will become more intimately connected with SOA if/when > REST becomes a predominant approach for building services. > > Anne > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:08 AM, Todd Biske <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]<todd.biske%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Given that RIA is primarily concerned about the presentation layer, > > and that an IT view of services is largely about the business layer, > > there's certainly a relationship between the two, just as there would > > be with any presentation layer technology. Beyond that, I don't see > > strong ties that would lead someone to say that the two are joined at > > the hip. > > > > If anything, the one similarity that may exist is that at present, > > we're just as poor at trying to figure out what user interface > > elements to mash together as we are at identifying what services need > > to be the heart of an enterprise portfolio. Portals once promised > > this highly integrated presentation tier, and while there are > > certainly small successes, one could argue that it was never leveraged > > to quite the extent that it was hyped. The hype around RIA talks > > about all of these mashups, but again, if there's not a business need > > to mash things together, it will be a solution looking for a problem. > > Beyond the mashup capabilities, there is certainly value in the > > underlying rich interface technologies to give a more interactive > > experience, but that is purely about the presentation tier. Using > > those technologies will certainly require more XML over HTTP, but > > again, much of its use may be focused on redesigning existing systems > > to support it, rather than enabling areas that hadn't been touched > > before. > > > > While this message may not indicate it, I'm very much an optimist. > > The problem I see is that we simply lack the contextual data required > > to make good decisions on how to leverage these techniques to their > > fullest potential, from both a producer side and a consumer side. A > > company that does have the right strategic view may be so far out > > ahead of demand that consumers of that business simply go "ho-hum". > > > > -tb > > > > > > On Mar 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Gervas Douglas wrote: > > > > > Just how relevant do you think RIA is to SOA and vice versa? > > > > > > Gervas > > > > > > >
