Comments on: Will we reconcile REST, WS-* and SOA? http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/ Realize your Web ideas ! Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:23:29 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Glen Newton http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-4338 Glen Newton Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:26:46 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-4338 The recent release of WSDL 2.0 by the W3C has added a REST binding. This shows how things have changed since 2000 and how the 2 (3?4?5?) communities have been working together better.... The recent release of WSDL 2.0 by the W3C has added a REST binding. This shows how things have changed since 2000 and how the 2 (3?4?5?) communities have been working together better….

]]> By: Eric Newcomer's Weblog http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-619 Eric Newcomer's Weblog Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:12:31 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-619 <strong>WS-* vs REST is not the question</strong> Update 2/13 5:10 pm. Apparently I initially missed this post from Jerome Louvel on the reconciliation idea... It's nice to see the Workshop get some attention in the blogosphere (hope I constructed those Google and Technorati searches ok). For a while... WS-* vs REST is not the question

Update 2/13 5:10 pm. Apparently I initially missed this post from Jerome Louvel on the reconciliation idea… It’s nice to see the Workshop get some attention in the blogosphere (hope I constructed those Google and Technorati searches ok). For a while…

]]> By: Eric Newcomer http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-618 Eric Newcomer Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:58:33 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-618 One unfortunate characterization of Web services, although perhaps appropriate (because of how they've been implemented) is that they are RPCs. The SOAP 1.1 specification says that "SOAP messages are fundamentally one-way transmissions from a sender to a receiver..." This is gone from the 1.2 spec, probably because it is more "informative" (i.e. more like an opinion or interpretation) than "normative" (i.e. required) information. But the statements about simplicity as a goal remain, including the deliberate omission of key features of object oriented technology (including "reliability", "security", "correlation", "routing", and "Message Exchange Patterns" (MEPs). An RPC is an instance of an MEP. I said for years that SOAP is not an RPC, and it certainly is not like RPCs we all know and love (i.e. DCE, IIOP, RMI) since one of the things it omits is the persistent session mechanism on top of which "traditional" RPCs layer their QoS features. But of course today it's harder to say that since if you go by the definition of SOAP as implemented in products, most of the time what you see is RPC wrapping. Newer toolkits are starting to emphasize support for plain XML and REST style interactions - the document style SOAP has always been in the specs but it seems as if products implement either one or the other (JBI being a kind of outlying exception to this) but not both. Anyway I am glad to see this post because this sort of discussion is what I'm hoping for at the Workshop, and with any luck we'll produce some good results in this area. One unfortunate characterization of Web services, although perhaps appropriate (because of how they’ve been implemented) is that they are RPCs.

The SOAP 1.1 specification says that “SOAP messages are fundamentally one-way transmissions from a sender to a receiver…”

This is gone from the 1.2 spec, probably because it is more “informative” (i.e. more like an opinion or interpretation) than “normative” (i.e. required) information.

But the statements about simplicity as a goal remain, including the deliberate omission of key features of object oriented technology (including “reliability”, “security”, “correlation”, “routing”, and “Message Exchange Patterns” (MEPs). An RPC is an instance of an MEP.

I said for years that SOAP is not an RPC, and it certainly is not like RPCs we all know and love (i.e. DCE, IIOP, RMI) since one of the things it omits is the persistent session mechanism on top of which “traditional” RPCs layer their QoS features.

But of course today it’s harder to say that since if you go by the definition of SOAP as implemented in products, most of the time what you see is RPC wrapping.

Newer toolkits are starting to emphasize support for plain XML and REST style interactions – the document style SOAP has always been in the specs but it seems as if products implement either one or the other (JBI being a kind of outlying exception to this) but not both.

Anyway I am glad to see this post because this sort of discussion is what I’m hoping for at the Workshop, and with any luck we’ll produce some good results in this area.

]]> By: Jérôme Louvel http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-609 Jérôme Louvel Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:15:13 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-609 By reconciling, I don't mean merging and blurring the differences. For sure, the Web (REST/HTTP/URI) will stay as it is today. As you point in your paper (http://www.w3.org/2007/01/wos-papers/bt), SOAP 1.2, WS-Addressing and WSDL 2.0 already attempted to better take the Web Architecture into consideration with unconvincing results. However, I believe that we are all attempting to solve the same goals of SOA and this could be the basis of the reconciliation. The REST camp has to move up the stack to better address the needs of enterprises. For example, how do you concretely implement business process integration with REST? How do you ensure ACID properties? REST itself doesn't solve all the interoperability issues (like the representation of business documents as XML/XSD and the binding to programming languages). I'm sure that the WS-* camp can bring valuable experience in these areas, at least so that we don't make the same mistakes twice. The next step is probably to fully reformulate the whole WS-* stack based on REST/HTTP/URI specifications. Also, WADL could be used as the description language. By reconciling, I don’t mean merging and blurring the differences. For sure, the Web (REST/HTTP/URI) will stay as it is today. As you point in your paper (http://www.w3.org/2007/01/wos-papers/bt), SOAP 1.2, WS-Addressing and WSDL 2.0 already attempted to better take the Web Architecture into consideration with unconvincing results.

However, I believe that we are all attempting to solve the same goals of SOA and this could be the basis of the reconciliation. The REST camp has to move up the stack to better address the needs of enterprises. For example, how do you concretely implement business process integration with REST? How do you ensure ACID properties? REST itself doesn’t solve all the interoperability issues (like the representation of business documents as XML/XSD and the binding to programming languages). I’m sure that the WS-* camp can bring valuable experience in these areas, at least so that we don’t make the same mistakes twice.

The next step is probably to fully reformulate the whole WS-* stack based on REST/HTTP/URI specifications. Also, WADL could be used as the description language.

]]> By: Paul Downey http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-608 Paul Downey Fri, 09 Feb 2007 09:39:37 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-608 Um, why do we need to reconcile both camps when the approaches differ so much and both have advantages beyond their intersection. I'd much prefer us to emphasis the differences, and take the Web word away from SOAP. Um, why do we need to reconcile both camps when the approaches differ so much and both have advantages beyond their intersection. I’d much prefer us to emphasis the differences, and take the Web word away from SOAP.

]]> By: Stefan Tilkov's Random Stuff http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-607 Stefan Tilkov's Random Stuff Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:08:12 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-607 <strong>Will we reconcile REST, WS-* and SOA?</strong> Jérôme Louvel: Hopefully, 2007 will be the year of reconciliation between both camps. REST proponents would understand and start to address more complex enterprise needs, like integration through business processes and provide more concrete g... Will we reconcile REST, WS-* and SOA?

Jérôme Louvel: Hopefully, 2007 will be the year of reconciliation between both camps. REST proponents would understand and start to address more complex enterprise needs, like integration through business processes and provide more concrete g…

]]> By: Web Things, by Mark Baker » Blog Archive » links for 2007-02-09 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-606 Web Things, by Mark Baker » Blog Archive » links for 2007-02-09 Fri, 09 Feb 2007 05:24:01 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-606 [...] Will we reconcile REST, WS-* and SOA? « Noelios Consulting - Supporting your Web ideas “This tension, often described as a battle, was in fact fruitful to both sides”. Indeed. Still one more thing for the WS-* folks to understand though; that REST is an *improvement* on SOA. (tags: rest webservices soap soa restvsoa restvsoap) [...] [...] Will we reconcile REST, WS-* and SOA? « Noelios Consulting – Supporting your Web ideas “This tension, often described as a battle, was in fact fruitful to both sides”. Indeed. Still one more thing for the WS-* folks to understand though; that REST is an *improvement* on SOA. (tags: rest webservices soap soa restvsoa restvsoap) [...]

]]> By: Avi Flax http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-605 Avi Flax Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:43:57 +0000 http://blog.noelios.com/2007/02/08/will-we-reconcile-rest-ws-and-soa/#comment-605 I certainly hope so! I certainly hope so!

]]>