1000% agree with Steve - Michael
________________________________ From: Steve Jones <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:10:52 AM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Fielding says It is okay to use POST I think the problem with most of the SOA committees and the problem with REST is that they address a series of technical challenges, create a potential answer and then feel that this is enough. With REST at least its honestly about the technology and solution area, the committees often masked that in some bullshit about the greater good. The basic problem in all these things is that they address a symptom and not a cause. Why does most IT suck? Why do most projects fail? Why does it cost a fortune for the FAA to continually fail to build a decent ATC system? The answer isn't in the technology. Its the same with the "Open Cloud" initiative (IMO) in that it is yet again the vested interests who are in charge of the committees. The way I look at it is this way. Its bad enough having the Senate in the US funded by big companies, its bad enough in the UK seeing the "sponsoring" of events by vested interests. The approach of IT however is the equivalent of putting AIG, Citibank and Freddie Mac in charge of the bailout plan. Whether it is individuals (Bjarne, Bertrand (Meyer), Roy or Gosling) who come up with a new technical approach or companies who seek to sustain the status quo the end result is fundamentally the same, there are some great advances and the bar is raised but the day to day building from that point remains poor. The problem is that end-user companies can rarely spend the time, effort or money on effective standards and committee engagement, but when they do their decisions will almost always be significantly better than those created by vendors. By better I mean "deliver more business benefit", they might be inelegant, they might be ugly but they will WORK and improve the business in those areas. I just don't think one person could make such a leap, the history of IT shows us massive visionaries who have revolutionised the technology base and really changed the way that people work. Gosling with Java being a great example. But as that scales to address bigger and bigger challenges the ability of a single individual to understand that scope and provide total direction becomes impossible, and sometimes they have blindspots (Meyer and multi-threading) that fundamentally undermine that progress. Got my depressing hat on today Steve 2009/3/30 Rob Eamon <rea...@cableone. net>: > Good point. My wish is indeed for an *effective* lead. > > In the long run, will the committee approach to SOA fare better than having > a Neo type of character for REST? > > I guess time will tell (although there seems to be some indicators even now > of how things will unfold). > > -Rob > > --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Steve Jones > <jones.steveg@ ...> wrote: >> >> What I mean is that having one person in charge of something doesn't >> always produce something that is truly effective, I'd say with C++ >> having one person as the oracle led to some significant issues over >> time. >> >> Steve > >
