Bindings, Platforms, and Innovation
This presentation focuses on the Internet and separating myth from fact, history from the future, and the mundane from the imaginative. Bob Frankston presents a vision of what could and should be.
Tracking change and innovation in the enterprise software development community
Posted by Stefan Tilkov on Nov 21, 2006 03:20 PM
With a very funny blog post, written in the form of a dialogue between a Web services expert and a hypothetical developer, Pete Lacey has started an amazing chain of postings. Here is quick excerpt, but be sure to read the whole post ("SG" stands for "SOAP guy"):
SG: Forget what I said. From here on in we pass around coarse-grained messages—you like that term, coarse-grained?. Messages that conform to an XML Schema. We call the new style Document/Literal and the old style RPC/Encoded.
Dev: XML Schema?
SG: Oh, it’s all the rage. Next big thing. Take a look.
Dev: (Reads XML Schema spec). Saints preserve us! Alexander the Great couldn’t unravel that.
Among the many industry luminaries linking to Pete's post are Nelson Minar, who designed the SOAP-based Google APIs for both Google's search AdWords and says he'd never choose SOAP and WSDL again, IBM's Sam Ruby, who shows that REST as an alternative to SOAP is not without (fixable) problems, Sun's Tim Bray, and Ruby on Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson.
Bill de hÓra's comment is a nice RESTafarian summary:
Which is worse, that everyone gets it now and we'll have REST startups in Q207, or that it took half a decade?
Comprehensive Threat Protection for REST, SOA, and Web 2.0 Applications
Give-away eBook – Confessions of an IT Manager
The Agile Business Analyst: Skills and Techniques needed for Agile
Would you enroll in an India Forex Group i.e http://www.indiaforex.com Groups?
>Which is worse, that everyone gets it now and we'll have REST startups in Q207, or that it took half a decade? Unfortunately, even that may be a false choice. My experience is that not everyone gets it now... so it's actually worse than either of those alternatives, sadly. I'm not suggesting that SOAP is the wrong choice for all cases (sometimes you don't control the choice of protocol between you and your collaborators), but it's just that when it clearly *is* the wrong choice, it's still too often the first tool to come out of the toolbox, as if it were the only one available.
While you're certainly right that there is still a lot of people who don't "get it", I do think that there's a lot more acceptance than, say, two years ago. Back then, even considering REST was considered weird ...
This presentation focuses on the Internet and separating myth from fact, history from the future, and the mundane from the imaginative. Bob Frankston presents a vision of what could and should be.
This article explores the use of JBoss and jBPM to implement design solutions that effectively address the issue of orchestrating long running activities.
This presentation covers the use of graph databases as an optimal solution for data that is difficult to fit in static tables, rapidly evolving data or data that has a lot of optional attributes.
This session introduces Real Options and shows how it can help in running your project. Real Options is a decision-making process that can be used to manage risk.
This article discusses the use of bindings on services and references (including the instance of non-configured bindings) as the means to implement SCA communications in a Web and SOA environment.
After a short introduction to DSLs, Scott Davis plays with the keyboard showing how to approach the creation of a DSL by typing working snippets of Groovy code that get executed.
IBM Rational and InfoQ present, Scaling Agile with C/ALM, an eBook showing organizations how to become “finely tuned software delivery machines” by enabling team integration and scaling.
Amanda Laucher presents a real life enterprise application written in F#. She shows actual code snippets, explaining design decisions and suggesting how to use some of the F# constructs.
2 comments
Watch Thread Reply