I recommend this article as a great high-level pass over the interoperability/integration landscape. Something which clicked for me in this article is that we are currently working with highly-provisional specifications: SOAP 1.2 and the SOAP 1.2 HTML Bindings are now at the recommendation level, WDSL 1.2 is in Working Draft, and other items are moving along.
So, along with the areas that are not addressed at this point, the implementations that we are all busily slapping together are based on provisional implementations of anticipated specifications of services infrastructures defined in notes and vendor implementations. All of the books, software, and course notes based on the 1.1 versions of these elements are on soggy ground, and the interoperability/integration issues being created by desperate early adoption of provisional solutions is moderately frightening.
Without getting too concerned with why the gerbil is being exhausted on this particular wheel, the importance of versioning and use of private namespaces to control alignment and ongoing migration is priceless. It looks like we will be doing legacy migration for a few years more, and the legacy is now going to be our particular versions of SOAP, WSDL, etc.
I can't review the article and type this comment form at the same time (next time I will do that differently) so this comment will be mercifully abbreviated here.
But I did want to commend the article for its cautionary observations about how sometimes the service comes out ugly, especially when force-fitting a legacy operation.
Give us more!
|
Previous Message
