[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: What is XP?
Since Sun was mentioned in this thread as "disparaging SOAP," I thought it would be useful to point to a recent post on the Apache soap-user list wherein our position is laid out comprehensively: http://archive.covalent.net/xml/soap-user/2000/12/0163.xml Happy holidays, Eve At 01:50 PM 12/15/00 -0800, Michael Brennan wrote: >Well, there was a debate about this on the xml-dist-app list. Since I >followed that debate with interest, I'll pretend that's what we are all >talking about rather than eXtreme Programming. :-) > >ebXML has tried to solve a larger set of problems than SOAP. SOAP takes a >minimalist approach. It defines a very simple XML-based messaging protocol. >It explicitly doesn't address issues such as security, reliable delivery of >messages, etc. These latter issues are critical to ecommerce, but the SOAP >philosophy is to build something simple and minimalistic, but also >extensible so solutions to these other issues can be addressed with other >specs and layered on top of SOAP. ebXML, in contrast, tries to tackle all of >these issues up front, as well as support for sending arbitrary binary data. >(ebXML uses MIME/multipart format for the outer envelope, not XML.) > >Some (such as Sun) continue to disparage SOAP and point out there are too >many issues it doesn't solve. Sun touts ebXML as a more robust alternative >to SOAP. Those who defend SOAP rightly point out that this misses the whole >point; other capabilities can be layered on top of SOAP. In addition, some >have characterized ebXML as too heavyweight for simple uses. ebXML defenders >point out that you don't have to use everything ebXML offers, and it can be >used for lightweight messaging as well (although I don't think ebXML >provides an RPC mapping like SOAP does). > >In the debate on the xml-dist-app list there seemed to be consensus that >convergence is both feasible and desirable. Those affiliated with the ebXML >effort seemed to agree that ebXML could be implemented as a layer on top of >SOAP. Furthermore, the charter of the XP working group (and the sentiments >generally expressed by the participants) is consistent with the SOAP >philosophy: develop a minimalist protocol that is good enough for the simple >cases and serves as a suitable substrate for the more complex cases. >However, since they are still in the requirements phase, we still have quite >a ways to go before we know what XP will look like. > >As anyone can probably tell, I'm taking a great interest in this activity. >Partly because it has immediate relevance to the work I am doing with XML; >but it is also certainly facinating watching how the XML world is evolving, >isn't it? > >The other aspect of this I have great interest in is the emergence of >data-binding tools that leverage XSD (or other schema languages). If anyone >encounters (or develops) cool tools for this, please share the info with the >list -- or at least with me. :-) -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ east.sun.com
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|