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

Re: [service-orientated-architecture] REST/WS*-SOAP Stack Comparison

Expand Messages
  • Mark Baker
    ... +1 ... I don t think the SOA RM has much to offer a discussion about stacks. I m happy to use OSI in full or in IETF-abbreviated form, or any other stack
    Message 1 of 166 , Aug 6, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      On 8/6/08, Steve Jones <jones.steveg@...> wrote:
      > I'm in. Can I suggest as its an SOA group that we have an SOA stack
      > rather than just REST/SOAP so we look at the different layers and then
      > we can map REST/SOAP onto a single model.

      +1

      > I'd also suggest using the
      > SOA RM as the basis for that stack.

      I don't think the SOA RM has much to offer a discussion about stacks.
      I'm happy to use OSI in full or in IETF-abbreviated form, or any other
      stack based model.

      Mark.
    • 1589cb5d7c61c18b5748b74490d0fcd6
      Hi guys, I ve seen your discussion regards to OTA. Do you have or know where I can find an OTA server example built in .Net? Where can I find the OTA wsdl to
      Message 166 of 166 , Nov 22, 2013
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi guys,


        I've seen your discussion regards to OTA.

        Do you have or know where I can find an OTA server example built in .Net?

        Where can I find the OTA wsdl to import? With provided OTA stuff I can only find the isolated .xsd files. Isn't there an OTA wsdl to get imported? 


        Thanks in advance



        ---In service-orientated-architecture@yahoogroups.com, <atmanes@...> wrote:

        Exactly my point, John. Not everyone agrees with your (and my)
        distinction between choreography and orchestration. I'm positing that
        the person writing the original article was, in fact, talking about
        orchestration rather than choreography.

        Anne

        On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:50 PM, John Evdemon <jevdemon@...> wrote:
        > On 23 Aug 2008 at 11:54, Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
        >
        >> If you define choreography as an executable workflow (a la
        >> BPEL), then I think it does
        >
        > Minor quibble: BPEL is an orchestration language, not a choreography
        > language.
        >
        > John
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.