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

SOAP BDG: Mission Impossible?

Expand Messages
  • gr@xo2.org
    Dave We didn t receive any relevant comment about our considerations on SOAP posted at: http://www.xmlrpc.com/discuss/msgReader$1500?mode=day For this reason
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Dave

      We didn't receive any relevant comment about our considerations on
      SOAP posted at:

      http://www.xmlrpc.com/discuss/msgReader$1500?mode=day

      For this reason we decided to write you a mail.

      Given that we programmed a full SOAP 1.1 implementation, server-side
      and client-side, we are able to enumerate some points that makes a
      SOAP parser complex and slow. Points that should be considered in a
      SOAP "Lite" version, otherwise, why do we need a "lite" version?

      Relevant examples could be that every namespace-fixup within the
      envelope requires another processing step, or that the parameter order
      is defined as "not significant".

      All these features are very nice, but make the parser very complex
      too. Are these features really needed and used? In some cases,
      limitations could be not too restrictive as thought and could simplify
      very much the implementation of a parser.

      Another big issue, given that SOAP is a simple OBJECT access protocol,
      is how do we address metadata information of objects (such as a unique
      server-side identifier) within the envelope? Can we give a formal
      specification in SOAP 1.2?

      We were quite thrilled about your BDG, because we thought that SOAP
      needed to gain momentum and support from the "small" developers. This
      in order to hinder Microsoft from "Embrace and Extend" practices, as
      they did with kerberos. We would like to have a small, deterministic,
      easy-but-complete specification of SOAP (your BDG) that could be
      deployed *now* without waiting for Microsoft lock-ins.

      We want to support BDG. We would like to see "def-before-use" in
      namespaces (makes parsing easier and faster), object references in the
      header (makes remote method invocation formalises), and order of
      parameter relevant (makes parsing more deterministic, and easier) in
      the BDG. These could be seen as restrictions, but they facilitate and
      formalise the parsing step. I mean, we come from the Prof. Wirth
      school... ;-)

      Best regards,
      Gabrio Rivera & Roberto Brega
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.