• From: Len Bullard <len.bullard@u...>
• To: Mark Baker <mark@c...>, Michael Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 12:29:34 -0600

That part is a bit bold.

Conceptualization is part of procurement.  What we say we are buying always
affects the choice of vendor.   Conceptualization rolls up details into neat
nameable packages.

The question in that case is 'who is this simpler for?'  XML and the web
movement in general tends to simplify for the programmer, but the
procurement/contract process became a lot tougher as a result.  

Scalability: this may have legs.  SOA/SOAP presumes an implementation that
works out of the box.  Complexity is an unavoidable side effect of that.
With complexity, scaling is reduced.

Evolvability:  that is tougher because that is multi-variate.   Do you mean
evolution of the specification, of the framework, of the application, or of
the network of nodes (the mashup) that becomes the super-system?

No properties:  This has no legs.  There are clearly properties but the SOA
vs REST argument has a long tradition of shifting among the domains of
discourse to deny the concerns of one or the other viewpoint to achieve some
kind of "victory".  That is why it is like the TAG debates over the meaning
of 'resource': a never-ending debate except by fiat.

But the 'victory' thing is pretty easily dismissed as SOA/SOAP is part of
too many shipping and running systems.  Popularity among the programmers is
an entirely separate and often minor concern.  The days when the web had to
be sold to programmers to get adoption is long past.

len


From: Mark Baker [mailto:mark@c...] 

IMO, conceptualization has nothing to do with it.  What does is, as
above, the architectural properties.  So if you want scalability,
evolvability, visibility, simplicity, etc.. you're on your own with
SOA because it has no constraints (that everyone agrees upon at least)
and therefore no properties.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.