I am not entirely sure what the question is? Which model? From a meta perspective, I think we have a client and server. The server provides a Service Facade of a domain model from a SOA or distributed systems perspective. The client consumes it as a Service (I have a little trouble with resource).
The client and server implementation architectures are independent and bound only by the interface between them. You can certainly implement the server using MVC but it's not a natural fit and I think just introduces more complexity though I am sure someone will argue for it. I think Service is an important part of the name is because of the high latency (relative), transactional characteristics that you may want to design for rather than just providing CRUD operations. For example you wouldn't want to implement 2-phase commit coordination at a client and would rather have a single interface method called transfer money taking two accounts and have a server make that an atomic transaction. In general I think services modeling to be around interaction semantics and higher level use cases than what I would think of as resource modeling. Ron On Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:45:40 AM UTC-5, ErickT wrote: > > I was having this discussion today, and wasn't able to express the > distinction between the two models very well. I think you are right in > calling one a client (JS) server (WCF style service). But what would > you call the other model? > > Thanks, > Erick > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Ronald Woan <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is the same discussion that Ruby developers seem to be having > regarding > > Rails vs Sinatra once you get past some point of complexity in clientside > > Javascript applications. > > I initiated similar discussions at the #alnetseattle meetings a couple > years > > back as I was struggling this migrating from XBAP/WPF applications to > > heavyweight extjs (sencha) applications. At that time, I ended up with > WCF > > webservices as the backend as I don't even think routing added much > value. > > Over time we modified this to use JSON in many cases. > > At some level I think we are just getting back to a client server model > > interacting through a services abstraction. A related discussion on the > > mailing lists has been what kind of model belongs on a client. > > Ron > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en. > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Seattle area Alt.Net" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/altnetseattle?hl=en.
