Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15149Re: What do you think about REST being a synonym of Service creation technique?

Expand Messages
  • William Martinez Pomares
    Apr 6 2:30 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Again, Stefan

      > Frankly, I'm not interested in discussing what SOA is or is not, as there's nobody who can decide who's right. It suits my purpose to define SOA as something that's high-level enough (or vague enough, if you prefer);

      That is totally fair!. My idea of setting it is to be clear upfront what the named concept means for each of us. Now I know yours and you know mine. :D

      Actually, I agree completely with your point of view about what people want and how should they get it. What I dislike a little bit is the naming confusion.

      I came up with a great idea. Let's create a new style called Ice Cream Oriented Architecture (ICOA). It has restrictions A and B, that will give you benefits X and Y. Someone reads about benefits, ignores the restrictions, and starts doing a flawed ICOA. Even worse: there is no Ice Cream, only nuts.

      After some years, someone else discovers the NOA (I'll let you figure out the acronym), that using nuts alone can get benefits W, X and Y. All is fine, you try to sell NOA and nobody buys it. Then you rename NOA as the next generation of ICOA (ICOA-NG), that uses the revolutionary nutty flavored HARD ice cream, that does not melt and has no milk (And it doesn't even need cooling anymore), and voila! Everybody loves it. Branding that is. And nobody, ever, enjoyed an Ice Cream in the process.

      So we agree in the core, not sure if we agree that the names can get to confusion, and may cause trouble thereafter.

      William.

      --- In rest-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Tilkov <stefan.tilkov@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi William,
      >
      > Frankly, I'm not interested in discussing what SOA is or is not, as there's nobody who can decide who's right. It suits my purpose to define SOA as something that's high-level enough (or vague enough, if you prefer); the reason is that I see many people who want something from SOA (easy interoperability, loose coupling, wide support in different platforms, …) that they can achieve more easily with RESTful HTTP than with SOAP/WSDL/WS-*. I can give them REST and they can still have their SOA cake.
      >
      > Related to that, I define "service" more as a mini-application than as an individual interface. When implemented using RESTful HTTP, it becomes a set of related resources (more commonly called a Web app) instead of a Web service (a set of WSDL-described individual SOAP interfaces).
      >
      > If you define SOA differently, this logic is flawed. Which is OK.
      >
      > Best,
      > Stefan
      >
      > On Apr 6, 2010, at 2:58 PM, William Martinez Pomares wrote:
      >
    • Show all 18 messages in this topic