Re: issue: SOAP requirements

[Dare Obasanjo <kpako@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Janne Jalkanen <jalkanen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> The PaceAtomActionHeader does it all for J2ME with a
> lot less hassle
> than SOAP (and has the added advantage of not
> needing base64).
> 
> I don't like SOAP either.  Too much excess baggage.
> 

> > just to express a verb?  Or are there other
> reasons to pull in SOAP?

When this effort started at least one vendor said SOAP
was a requirement for them (Google/Blogger) and at
least one vendor has implemented SOAP
(Sixapart/TypePad). However given that SOAP support is
currently underspecified (e.g. there is no WSDL) every
client developer either has to (a) hack their own WSDL
or (b) do SOAP by hand in which case they might as
well just use the REST API. 

I find the latter extremely worrying given that a
number of weblog tool vendors have expressed interest
in a SOAP API that this WG has consistently neglected
that area of the spec. 

This is a recipe for lack of interoperability and will
likely mirror the current landscape in weblog APIs
where any developer new to the space has to reverse
engineer the behavior of popular client and server
tools to know what to implement. 

Bottom line: Doing SOAP without using a WSDL is
practically useless for most developers. Flickr did
this for their API and it resulted in 99% of their
traffic using their POX* or XML-RPC APIs. 

*Their API isn't RESTful even though they label it as
such. 

THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #222
I reserve the right to execute any henchmen who appear to be a little too intelligent, powerful, or devious. However if I do so, I will not at some subsequent point shout "Why am I surrounded by these incompetent fools?!"


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/