David Chappell

  • September 2020
  • November 2017
  • April 2017
  • October 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • August 2015
  • April 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003

Opinari

Get the Feed! Subscribe

Responses to REST vs. WS-*: War is Over (If You Want It)  
# Monday, July 23, 2007
 
Well, maybe the war’s not completely over. Judging from the responses to my recent entry, a few people are still girded for battle. Some examples:

- I said “A RESTful approach is a natural for data-oriented applications that focus on create/read/update/delete scenarios”. Some took this as an assertion that REST was only useful in these scenarios. I didn’t mean this. Still, believing that a RESTful approach is right for everything seems too strong. As Microsoft’s Steve Maine pointed out, the fact that I can do anything with the universal interface of a Turing machine doesn’t mean that I want to write all of my apps that way.

- Comments like this: “What is this amazing security mechanism that WS-* has that cannot be applied to REST?” are easy to answer, but comments like this: “[N]obody uses SOAP. Everyone has had the ability to choose it for years, and nobody does” are more puzzling. SOAP and WS-* are used in many, many enterprise applications today, and they’ll be in a bunch more by this time tomorrow. Transferring money between accounts at my bank depends on SOAP, for example, as do many other commercial functions that we all rely on. For clients interacting with Internet applications, a RESTful approach is often—usually, even—the right choice. For creating typical enterprise apps inside the firewall, SOAP and WS-* are commonly better, and lots of people use them.

- A few people commented on the number of specs in the WS-* canon. The relevant number, however, is how many of those specs a developer must understand to write an application using SOAP and WS-*. Assuming a decent framework, such as Microsoft’s WCF or the Java world's SCA, that number might well be zero. Just as the creator of a sockets app needn’t read the specs for TCP and IP, the creator of a SOAP/WS-* app can remain largely ignorant of how these technologies provide their services.

- And to be clear, I wasn’t making any kind of analogy between WS-*/REST and Korea/World War II. My only goal was to provide an example of a truce rather than an overwhelming victory. Ted Neward’s erudite response to this brief mention was nothing short of awe-inspiring, however.

Nobody feels strongly about whether the sun will come up tomorrow—people are only passionate when something is in doubt. Now that the value of REST is as certain as tomorrow’s sunrise, perhaps we can all lighten up a little. Readers seemed to focus on the first part of the John Lennon quote in the entry’s title rather than the equally important second half: The WS-*/REST war is over only if we want it to be. And we certainly should—it’s a waste of our energy.


0 comments :: Post a Comment

 


Comments:

Post a Comment


<< Home