3 ms·
The stuff about the utility of machine-readable Web Service Description Language got me rolling my eyes. WSDL is just pure nonsense. The idea that software wou
by jongjong 1y ago
The stuff about the utility of machine-readable Web Service Description Language got me rolling my eyes.
WSDL is just pure nonsense. The idea that software would need to decide which API endpoints it needs on its own, is just profoundly misguided... Literally nobody and nothing ever reads the WSDL definitions; it's just poor man's documentation, at best.
LLMs only reinforce the idea that WSDL is a dumb idea because it turns out that even the machines don't care for your 'machine-friendly' format and actually prefer human-friendly formats.
Once you have an MPC tool working with a specific JSON API, it will keep working unless the server makes breaking changes to the API while in production which is terrible practice. But anyway, if you use a server, it means you trust the server. Client-side validation is dumb; like people who need to put tape over their mouths because they don't trust themselves to follow through on their diet plans.
- layer8 1y agoWSDLs are routinely used to generate the language bindings for the SOAP actions. WSDL being language-agnostic ensures that bindings in different languages, and/on the client vs the server side, are consistent with each other. WSDLs being available from the servers allows (a) clients to validate the requests they make before sending them to the server, and (b) developers (or in principle even AI) with access to the server to create a client without needing further out-of-band specifications.
- jongjong 1y agoI think this is unwise. There are a lot of things that clients need to take into account which cannot be described by WSDLs (e.g. timing related or language specific considerations which require careful thinking through). I don't buy this idea that code should be generated automatically without a human involved (at least as a reviewer). I also don't buy the idea that clients should validate their requests before sending to the server. The client's code should trust itself. I object to any idea of code (or any entity) not trusting itself. That is a flawed trust model.
- zaphar 1y ago> WSDL being language-agnostic ensures that bindings in different languages, and/on the client vs the server side, are consistent with each other. In theory. In reality java could talk to java. M$ stuff could talk to other M$ stuff. And pretty much everyone else was left out in the cold. consistent cross language interop never actually happened despite the claims that it would.