Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Bray Prefers it Web-Style

[Eric Newcomer]

Jan,

 

I am going to answer based on an assumption, so please let me know if this isn't correct.

 

I am assuming that you and I are thinking about different things about the term "formalized."

 

I would say that the REST architecture is sufficiently formalized, but that what I mean is Web services are specified in more detail with respect to interoperability formats, a description/interface language, addressing, security, reliability, transactional headers, etc.   So it is in that respect that I meant WS-* is more formalized - REST does not have a family of specifications defining it.

 

I would add that this is also a sort of strange situation, in which on the one had we have a clear software architecture without any accompanying specs, and on the other no real consistent architecture and a bunch of related specs.

 

Eric

----- Original Message ----
From: Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: service-orientated-architecture@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 5:19:59 PM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Bray Prefers it Web-Style

On Sep 15, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Eric Newcomer wrote:

> I also think that REST, although less formalized than WS-*,
> represents a valid technology choice for an SOA.

Eric,

I am honestly curious what makes you think that REST is less
formalized than WS-*. Can you explain that?

I mean: Roy's dissertation is among the very few things I have read
that do *not* (never!) fill out the blanks with hand waving. (One
should really do an adverb-count on it some day!).

Jan

__._,_.___

SPONSORED LINKS

Computer software program	Computer software spy	Computer job
Database software	Discount computer software

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___