On 1/8/07, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--On 8. Januar 2007 10:42:34 -0330 Rocky Burt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-07-01 at 14:54 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> I think that an add-on product which provided a SOAP server,
>> implementing one of the competing semantics, could be interesting as a
>> starting point, although it might not be terribly resuable.
> While I'm not necessarily a huge SOAP advocate (personally I just want
> RPC that works) that pasted link does a *very* good job of portraying a
> subjective view on how confusing soap is. That is... it's only
> propaganda. Sticking with just SOAP (no wsdl, no uddi, no xml schema)
> you can make services as simple as xml-rpc.
I fully agree with that. SOAP is widely adopted but everything else
on SOAP might be considers as YAGNI.
> Everything beyond standard soap tries to give it an infinite amount of
> power that is best compared to the extremely large number of corba
This stuff is in some way too overengineered and too complex for being
adopted in projects. Specs that are only understandable for the editors
specs for the trashcan.
Reading wsdl is pita, but soap support without wsdl support is of no value
for me, and I would not be surprised if I there are that many people that do
not have to adhere to some complicated wsdl spec.
Zope3-dev mailing list