Anne,

Thank you very much!
I really appreciate your responsive and insightful explanations,
arguments, and pointers.
I am also very excited to know the REST debate.

Unique interface is my first impression of REST, like the HTTP
protocol. Could I ask you another question on REST?
Is it a must that in RESTful system, the service's operation must have
a signature "void OperationName(void)"? Then how to transfer
invocation specific parameters? Does it imply that we must turn to
HTTP and put those operation parameters in HTTP attributes?


Regards,
Xinjun

On 9/1/06, Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not a debate between POX and Axis (specifically) -- it's between
POX and SOAP/WS-*. And the REST debate is one between
service-orientation versus resource-orientation. Note that REST
doesn't preclude the use of SOAP and WS-*. The significant distinction
is in the operations exposed by the service. In unRESTful systems, the
service exposes a customized set of operations, e.g., getQuote,
getCustomerByID, calculateSalesTax, etc. In a RESTful system, the
service exposes a generic interface, e.g., Get, Put, Post, Delete.
Passing in a method name with a set of parameters is unRESTful.

Here's a nice writeup on REST:
http://www.xfront.com/REST-Web-Services.html

This article summarizes some of the debate about SOAP being too "enterprisey":
http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=614

Also, you can Google "SOAP enterprisey" and find more.

Anne

On 8/31/06, Michael Larkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Anne,
>
> I would like to know more about the debate between AXIS and POX supporters
> and would be grateful if you would point me in the right direction (without
> bringing the debate into this forum).
>
> You said: "There is a growing backlash against the complexity of SOAP and
> WS-*, and in response, people are looking for a simpler, more native-Web
> approach to services. And that's POX -- Plain Old XML over HTTP. HTTP is a
> very powerful and scalable application protocol. It supports clean
> separation of header and application payload. It provides a means to support
> self-describing messages (using MIME types). It supports security (HTTPS)
> and stateful sessions (cookies). Many argue that the SOAP envelope and all
> the SOAP Headers are just a lot of extra clutter. And for many applications,
> that's true. POX is absolutely adequate."
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to