[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] The DIKW Hierarchy issue(s)

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Toby.Considine@xxxxxxxxx" <Toby.Considine@xxxxxxxxx>
From: Joel Bender <jjb5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:14:31 -0400
Message-id: <4A40F157.7070305@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 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)

[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)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>