Michael Poulin wrote:
If you mean Web Service when talking about service, I understand
what you said.
I definitely didn't mean to limit my statement to Web Services.
The plethora of Web Service standards is just one, not particularly
elegant, way of implementing services. I was speaking in terms of
the general concept of a service, not one implementation technology.
Nevertheless, I stay with my statement. I tried to explane this in
one of my latest posts.
Personally, I am in favor of aggregated services rather than
composite applications.
Is the difference between those two deeper than mere semantics?
Judge by yourself:
aggregated services comprise self-contained services ( at the bottom
of the service pyramid) while composite applications may contain non-
service which we might not know how to deal with. I dislike this
potential ambiguity.
If the functionality provided by the applications is wrapped in one
or more services, the two become synonymous. In many cases, this is
the best practice.
Regards,
Patrick
----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
S P Engineering, Inc.
Large scale, mission-critical, distributed OO systems design and
implementation.
(C++, Java, Common Lisp, Jini, middleware, SOA)
