Comments on: SOAP is boring, wake up Big Vendors or get niched

By: James Governor

James Governor — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 20:17:46 +0000

For a range of application types WS-* and SOAP are overly heavyweight.

By: Jan Penninkhof

Jan Penninkhof — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:45:02 +0000

I don’t think I agree with the fact that developers in general are turning their backs on WS-*. It is just that WS_* based SOA in the enterprise is now mature and perhaps less spoken of. Meanwhile, many organisations have take it as a new realm and demand new applications to be developed according to their x-layer model, that usually comprises a message bus or other SOA related tools. Usually the web-services built in these x-tier development projects are eventually stored in the ESR or at least documented somewhere.

Architecturally an enterprise solution based on REST looks fundamentally different from one that is based on WS-*. Although you could mark the REST services as enterprise services as well, they can’t e.g. be used on a service bus and can’t be included in most enterprise service repositories.

Although I do like to light-weight characteristics of REST, I somehow have the feeling that this makes REST a crippled contender rather than an evolvement when it concerns enterprise services.

By: Nicole Carrier

Nicole Carrier — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:44:15 +0000

Hi, James – Interesting post. I, personally, love the simplicity of REST. As far as IBM goes, IBM Mashup Center is a product that not only consumes RESTful services, but also generates them..

By: Davanum Srinivas

Davanum Srinivas — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:37:35 +0000

James, I am not sure if you are aware of Apache Wink (http://incubator.apache.org/wink/). Websphere team has actively contributed to Apache Wink (a JAX-RS implementation) and hopefully the work will show up soon in the release stream (http://webspherecommunity.blogspot.com/2009/08/apache-wink-and-jax-rs.html). You can directly use Apache Wink now on existing WAS 6.x and 7.x releases as well

thanks,
dims

By: Vanesss

Vanesss — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:56:20 +0000

Yes Soap is boring and guess who has to learn it.. They are dev. an app here too, i can’t believe they want to use that :/

By: snork

snork — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 07:26:55 +0000

I have to learn soap for an app that we’re building. yeah, it’s way boring — tedious

By: Robert, ecommerce pro

Robert, ecommerce pro — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:17:11 +0000

I do agree with you. Think it becomes useless.

By: Uche Ogbuji

Uche Ogbuji — Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:41:32 +0000

I did see your blog earlier, but didn’t think to respond. For one thing, I’m a bit wary of the idea of a snap-on REST toolkit. I suspect that Wizard-think is one of the problems that is killing Web services. Apps should be made easier to build by the concepts behind either REST or WS, but only if one accepts the fact that domain modeling is hard, and that these technologies can only work their magic once you have the domain model right. We are working on the edges of this problem at Fourthought in both OSS and commercial initiatives, but I’d be wary of making big claims for our work just yet. It was interesting to see what happened to the SAJAX folks when they jumped too carelessly on the bandwagon.

By: Matt MacKenzie

Matt MacKenzie — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 03:34:47 +0000

What is wrong with the ds:Reference element ref you mention, and how would you propose fixing it?

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:42:27 +0000

‘Doesn’t ebXML use SOAP 1.1 as its enveloping protocol?’
no, ebms does.

As long as we are on xml technologies that are bloated and too much damn trouble to use, the xml schemas for ebms have some real problems such as
maxOccurs=”unbounded”/>
maxOccurs=”unbounded”/>