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

146Re: [soap-newbies] New Message: Comments on WSDL

Expand Messages
  • Doug Davis
    Nov 5, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Well, sure that stuff can work but one of the benefits
      of WSDL (or supposed benefits 8-) is that it makes it
      easier to do this stuff programmatically. I don't see
      how WSDL solves it yet - I still believe that a human
      will need to be heavily involved in the process, but
      I guess I always hoped that WSDL was just a step in the
      process of coming up with the solution that will not
      require a human. We're not there yet, and probably
      not that close - but people are trying. Docs, samples
      and mailing lists are a fall-back solution to me.

      It is interesting that you see WSDL as too static, but
      Docs and samples are not. Seems like WSDL could change
      just as often (and probably with less headaches) than
      docs/samples.

      -Dug

      ps. Again - my opinions! 8-)


      "Dave Winer" <dave@...> on 11/05/2001 01:31:19 PM

      Please respond to soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com

      To: <soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com>
      cc:
      Subject: Re: [soap-newbies] New Message: Comments on WSDL



      Good question!

      1. Docs.

      2. Sample code.

      3. A mail list.

      Now a philosophical question. Why do people ask this question so often. Is
      it a mystery? Isn't this how it's always worked?

      Dave


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Doug Davis" <dug@...>
      To: <soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 10:27 AM
      Subject: Re: [soap-newbies] New Message: Comments on WSDL


      > Well, let's continue this then with the assumptions you've
      > mentioned: everything is dynamic and it costs a lot to
      > produce something static (like WSDL).
      > If I'm a client and I want to talk to your getQuote service
      > (ignore for a moment how I know you're even offering it),
      > how do I know what to send? You're not going to provide me
      > with something like WSDL (too static), so how do I know what
      > parameters your getQuote takes? Or what headers you're
      > expecting?
      > -Dug
      >
      >
      > "Dave Winer" <dave@...> on 11/05/2001 12:47:13 PM
      >
      > Please respond to soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > To: <soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com>
      > cc:
      > Subject: Re: [soap-newbies] New Message: Comments on WSDL
      >
      >
      >
      > Doug, please consider that I believe point 6 to be true (and perhaps the
      > most important of the points). Therefore I'm not going to propose
      something
      > here -- because I believe that IDLs make a lot of exclusionary
      assumptions
      > about the kind of language and runtime environment a developer is using.
      I
      > don't happen to use an environment that can make good use of them, or
      > generate them automatically, and I'm far from alone in that -- most Web
      > application environments are dynamic -- you don't know the types of the
      > parameters and can't without adding a lot of overhead for app developers.
      > Java and .Net are different, they're static environments, more power to
      you
      > if you like programming that way -- but I like to let the environment do
      a
      > lot of work for me in handing a type coercion. I'm not going back to
      static
      > environments. Dave
      >
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Doug Davis" <dug@...>
      > To: <soap-newbies@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 9:07 AM
      > Subject: Re: [soap-newbies] New Message: Comments on WSDL
      >
      >
      > > (Speaking just for myself - ignore the mail address 8-)
      > >
      > > Dave wrote:
      > > >It can only work in static environments such as Java and .Net and not
      in
      > > >dynamic environments that are popular with Web developers, including
      but
      > > not
      > > >limited to Perl, Python, PHP, and UserLand Frontier.
      > >
      > > If WSDL does not work in a particular use-case then propose something
      > > that will - if its good enough people (including IBM and MS) I'm sure
      > will
      > > be interesting in playing too.
      > >
      > > >Today WSDL is not a basis for interop. If there is interop it's only
      > > >between Java and .Net.
      > >
      > > I don't believe the guys on SOAPBuilders would agree with this - I'm
      > > pretty sure there are other SOAP processors joining in.
      > >
      > > >There can be no significant support for this by independent developers
      > > >because it shuts them out.
      > >
      > > Whether or not it shuts people out is no indication of whether the
      > > technology/ideas behind WSDL are good or not.
      > > I'm no huge fan of WSDL - but it seems to fit a need - and I'm sure
      when
      > > (not "if" but "when") something else comes along if it is better than
      > WSDL
      > > people will try to support it.
      > >
      > > >These companies want the endorsement of the W3C. They're trying to
      > > redefine
      > > >the rules so that only their products can satisfy them. This is a good
      > > test of
      > > >the W3C's independence from the big companies.
      > > >Philosophically this faceoff is directly comparable to the
      > tightly-coupled
      > >
      > > >and managed hypertext environments that were theorized before the
      > > >loosely-coupled HTML-HTTP web came along, and wiped out all the
      > theories.
      > > SOAP
      > > >alone, without the tight coupling promised by WSDL, is being widely
      > > deployed,
      > > >without Microsoft and IBM. This must irk them. But don't thwart the
      > spirit
      > > of
      > > >the Web, it's still alive, in this venue.
      > > >Tell Microsoft and IBM to go back to the drawing board. It's the right
      > > >thing to do, maybe next time around they won't create such a
      > self-serving
      > > >specification that goes against the interests of independent
      developers.
      > >
      > > So what's your proposal? Or, if you've offered one why is it not
      > > taking off?
      > >
      > > -Dug
      > >
      > >
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > soap-newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > soap-newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > soap-newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >


      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      soap-newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Show all 25 messages in this topic