> Why would SOAP messages start carrying application logic such as 2
> phased commits etc. I an curious to know what others on this list
> think of this development. (01)
I suspect this is because developers are using SOAP as a remote
procedure call - with a pathetically verbose parameter serialization
that hopefully their debugging toolkit will take care of on their
behalf. It fits with what they understand. (02)
Speaking as one, programmers are really not very interested in the
details how work gets done. The LAMP stack is popular because it
provides a stable place to stand and build applications. Similarly,
when an application gets complicated enough, building on top of a layer
that provides virtual synchrony [1], even if it's at the expense of
limiting scalability, means that even more work can get done. (03)
Adding a transaction identifier to a list of parameters, and then
checking again to see if anything failed, is a pretty simple thing to
do. Using RPC, ASN-1, XMLRPC, SOAP, JSON, is just noise. (04)
Oh, and there's the whole "why don't OWL classes work like
Java/C++/Python/UML/Objective-C classes? This 'ontology' mumbo jumbo is
crap." doesn't help. (05)
Joel
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_synchrony (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|