On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Gregg Wonderly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > */[HS] It seems to me that Gregg’s underlying assumption is that the > > whole world speaks Java. As you say, this is not how the world works./* > > My question (not assumption) is why is it more expensive or less attractive > to > speak the Java serialization standard as opposed to XML? Both require > software > systems to be integrated and installed as part of your SOA. What things > make it > seem "cheaper" or "easier" to use XML. > Greg, even if your position was technically correct (at least I personally don't think so) , the practicality of advocating that is as naiive as Microsoft's earlier woo to Java developers: "Have you heard of .Net?". (Now Microsoft has gotten past that silliness IMO and is advocating simply running your Java on Windows.) XML is the ONLY standard for exchanging information that is supported by everyone. Until that changes, there's no point in wasting time IF the objective of the endpoint is to be universally communicable. If you're in some closed world you can do whatever you want - and there's no shortage of alternatives there, including Java serialization. Sanjiva. -- Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/ Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
