• From: Ruslan Shevchenko <Ruslan@S...>
• To: Brendan Macmillan <bren@m...>
• Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:17:24 +0300

Brendan Macmillan wrote:
> 
> Hi Ruslan,
> 
> Thanks for the pointer to comp.object.corba
> 
> I think the statement in there that
>         SOAP/XML-RPC is about data, and
>         CORBA is about objects (plus infrastructure: naming service etc)
> sounds pretty accurate.
> 

SOAP is not data.

May be next :
  XML-RPC and SOAP about XML-based encoding
  CORBA IIOP about CORBA-based encoding.


 ............

> >
> > // Whay this have sence from technical point of view, you can
> > // read in our ISTA-2001 article:
> >
> > http://www.gradsoft.com.ua/eng/whitepapers/ISTA2001/ISTA2001-final.htm
> But no XML in there...
> 

It's about passing via web: i. e. the statement is that for LAN and
WAN we need different graining: LAN is CORBA, WAN is XML or HTML
 which do not matter in this context.

By other words:

 Fine grained object models: local machine
  // objecl languagess, COM
 Coarse grained object models: LAN
   // CORBA, DCOM
 Gigantic grained object models: WAN
   // SOAP, XML-RPC


-- 
Ruslan Shevchenko
GradSoft: Chief Software Architect
http://www.gradsoft.com.ua/eng/

• References:
  • Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
    • From: Brendan Macmillan <bren@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb
• Next by Date: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb
• Previous by thread: Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
• Next by thread: Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread