• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: Re: SOAP and the Web
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:38:48 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>, spolsky@p...
• References: <E08661VVU4YRTPE9XUOK05LFBA5ZMJ.3cc87274@MChamp> <3CC886FF.C25973CD@p...> <1019775911.824.95.camel@l...>

"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> 
> Did you get anyone defending SOAP on its technical merits?

Technical merits?

Not really. There were quite a few who technically bashed it in response
to Joel's article though:

 * http://discuss.fogcreek.com/joelonsoftware/default.asp

> You and Mark Baker seem to present more technical defense than any of
> the "advocates", which has me thoroughly confused.
> 
> (Don Box did bring up a common framing format[1], but I'm having a hard
> time seeing the format mitigating the overall approach.)

Actually, if I get time I will write an article on how XML is a lousy
envelope format (whatever its other virtues!).

 Paul Precod

• References:
  • RE: lots of WS reading material
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • SOAP and the Web
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: SOAP and the Web
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: problems with using DOM to parse XML
• Next by Date: Re: idempotent POSTs
• Previous by thread: Re: SOAP and the Web
• Next by thread: Re: SOAP and the Web
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread