MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » July 2008

Re: iPhone Rich UI



fixed

So, while you can probably technically get away the argument that you don't
need a WSDL for a web service, at that point you can't justify SOAP and XML,
because the extra overhead serves no purpose. At that point, JSON/REST is
by far the better protocol.

I would agree with that for how you are probably doing web services, which
is from the browser to the server and vice versa. But JSON/REST doesn't
hold a lot of water in the more traditional web service space where you
don't have blackbox control over each end of the spectrum but are instead
communicating with a business partner. Then the popularity of HTTP/XML/XSD
shines through (whether we like it or not) and is a VERY common method of
communication. For the record I think WSDL's are an excellent idea that has
been plagued with complexities of "exception programming" vs. making them
easy to use.

Anyway, I'm going to get out of this. Your original question was whether
EGL can handle web services without WSDLs and the answer is unequivocally
yes.

That really only is part of what I asked. I wanted to know *how* EGL does
it specifically because many people will be confronted with needing to do
it. If you don't have time to put together a sample that is fine, just say
so.

......moving to David's post....
<David>Based on this description, I would say that Joe is correct.

By golly, I stand corrected with their latest revisions. Guess I am going
to have to start reading new versions of specs at length when they come out
(yuck).

Here is where I was drawing my conclusions:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-ws-arch-20030514/#id2608426 and then also the
many different implementations I have seen. Here's the note from dbooth on
the matter from the above URL:


*[dbooth: Two problems with this definition: (1) What are "bindings"? (We
haven't defined them.) Why are they relevant to the definition of a Web
service? I think we could just omit "and bindings" from the definition. (2)
Does a WS really need to have a "discoverable" WSD in order to be a WS? A WS
certainly could have a private WSD or a WSD that is developed
collaboratively rather than being "discovered". Also, it seems odd to define
something X based on the existence of something else Y that is not a part of
X. I suggest instead: "A Web service is a software system identified by a
URI, whose public interfaces are defined and described using XML. Other
systems may interact with the Web service in a manner prescribed by its
definition, using XML based messages conveyed by internet protocols."]*

My apologies for belaboring the point.

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com





Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact