El 29/10/2008, a las 8:58, Guy Rixon escribió:
> http://www.from9till2.com/PermaLink.aspx?guid=65d8d39e-bef1-4793-96c1-fa36827f98f1
I've read the article (an exercise of linking "patriotic" values to SOA, and naming REST as UnAmerican; not very suitable for an International VO Alliance ;-)), but what I think in this issue does not relate to it, and it is quite general:
Use the tool that better fits what you want to do.
In my opinion, for many services just HTTP calls with params are more than enough; we have got registries that allow service discovery, without having to deal with UDDI; and we have VOTable and other XML Schemas which encapsulate the meaning we need. We don't need the many SOAP transport options, or many other "bells & whistles"
However, doing REST "right", i.e., à la Fielding, means we have to decide whether we put known targets first, with operations later, or whether we focus on operations and then encode parameters... while the typical HTTP params just put everything on the same area.
So, let's be pragmatic on this. We have very successful services not using SOAP, but not "properly REST-ful", and I think we should leave it like that. On the other hand, all the registry comes from a standard using SOAP, and we should also keep it like that.
Reviewing everything, I would just leave the DAL protocols (past and future) as they are, and leave new, no DAL protocol, establish what they need to use.
-- Juan de Dios Santander Vela Diplomado en CC. Físicas, Ingeniero en Electrónica Doctorando en Tecnologías Multimedia Becario Predoctoral del Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía Arjojólico: Dícese del dipsómano andaluz que ha llegado al punto en que todo le produce jocosidad.Received on 2008-10-29Z18:05:51