Prev: Seriously, who CODES in Linux? What IDE? Seriously.
Next: Excel to IList<Object> and Back
From: Arne Vajhøj on 14 May 2010 19:25
On 14-05-2010 09:58, RayLopez99 wrote:
> On May 14, 9:03 am, RayLopez99<raylope...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Now, SOAP or REST? That is the question I pose to you. i'm getting
>> into WCF and SOAP now. Seems like a lot of XML stuff, which is OK
>> with me.
>
> Here is what I found from the link Rex Ballard posted (sounds
> reasonable to me). So SOAP is superior.

> To summarize their strengths and weaknesses:
> *** SOAP ***
> Pros:
> � Langauge, platform, and transport agnostic
> � Designed to handle distributed computing environments
> � Is the prevailing standard for web services, and hence has better
> support from other standards (WSDL, WS-*) and tooling from vendors
> � Built-in error handling (faults)
> � Extensibility
> Cons:
> � Conceptually more difficult, more "heavy-weight" than REST
> � More verbose
> � Harder to develop, requires tools
> *** REST ***
> Pros:
> � Language and platform agnostic
> � Much simpler to develop than SOAP
> � Small learning curve, less reliance on tools
> � Concise, no need for additional messaging layer
> � Closer in design and philosophy to the Web
> Cons:
> � Assumes a point-to-point communication model--not usable for
> distributed computing environment where message may go through one or
> more intermediaries
> � Lack of standards support for security, policy, reliable messaging,
> etc., so services that have more sophisticated requirements are harder
> to develop ("roll your own")
> � Tied to the HTTP transport model

I am not sure that comp.os.linux.advocacy is relevant for this
discussion.

The summary is reasonable.

I would not conclude that SOAP is better than REST.

As usual it is all about picking the right tool
for the job.

Arne
From: The Big Ticket on 14 May 2010 19:33
Arne Vajh�j wrote:
> On 14-05-2010 09:58, RayLopez99 wrote:
>> On May 14, 9:03 am, RayLopez99<raylope...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Now, SOAP or REST? That is the question I pose to you. i'm getting
>>> into WCF and SOAP now. Seems like a lot of XML stuff, which is OK
>>> with me.
>>
>> Here is what I found from the link Rex Ballard posted (sounds
>> reasonable to me). So SOAP is superior.
>
>> To summarize their strengths and weaknesses:
>> *** SOAP ***
>> Pros:
>> � Langauge, platform, and transport agnostic
>> � Designed to handle distributed computing environments
>> � Is the prevailing standard for web services, and hence has better
>> support from other standards (WSDL, WS-*) and tooling from vendors
>> � Built-in error handling (faults)
>> � Extensibility
>> Cons:
>> � Conceptually more difficult, more "heavy-weight" than REST
>> � More verbose
>> � Harder to develop, requires tools
>> *** REST ***
>> Pros:
>> � Language and platform agnostic
>> � Much simpler to develop than SOAP
>> � Small learning curve, less reliance on tools
>> � Concise, no need for additional messaging layer
>> � Closer in design and philosophy to the Web
>> Cons:
>> � Assumes a point-to-point communication model--not usable for
>> distributed computing environment where message may go through one or
>> more intermediaries
>> � Lack of standards support for security, policy, reliable messaging,
>> etc., so services that have more sophisticated requirements are harder
>> to develop ("roll your own")
>> � Tied to the HTTP transport model
>
> I am not sure that comp.os.linux.advocacy is relevant for this
> discussion.
>

The NG and the clowns in it are worthless. You can't see that? You
should stop cross posting to that worthless NG.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Seriously, who CODES in Linux? What IDE? Seriously.
Next: Excel to IList<Object> and Back