Comments on: How IBM WebSphere got REST Religion but forgot to tell anyone. Thoughts from Connect09

By: James Governor

James Governor — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:23:08 +0000

ATM – thanks for the clarifications. but if anyone was guilty of over selling UDDI it was systinet… http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/01/09/mercury-buys-systinet-uddi-way-or-the-highway/

By: Anne Thomas Manes

Anne Thomas Manes — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:56:14 +0000

Just thought I’d point out that WSRR never implemented UDDI. In response to customer demand, IBM enabled WSRR to UDDI synchronization, but WSRR has always used a proprietary model and API. It was originally a bit REST-like — except that it used a proprietary URL-like addressing scheme to reference entries in the registry. In v2 they got some sense and exposed those entries directly via URLs and HTTP. But the RESTiness only works for artifacts (WSDLs, schemas, etc) in the registry. Nice that they now make updates to the registry available via Atom, but it’s a bit late in coming. And the registry is still only partially RESTful. Meanwhile HP’s Systinet Repository has always been completely RESTful — everything in the repository (including stored queries) is accessed via a URL, and any query can be exposed as an Atom feed. (Note that Systinet Repository is different from Systinet Registry — which is UDDI compliant.)

By: Analyst: IBM WebSphere appears to be more well-RESTed | Service-Oriented Architecture | ZDNet.com

Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:12:43 +0000

[...] products. James Governor, for one, says IBM — without much fanfare — is now enabling service oriented architecture through the REST style of architecture on its WebSphere registry/repos…. In all fairness, IBM claims it did send out the memo on that. Nevertheless, this represents a sea [...]