3 ms·
Was that really an accident? I know many of the WS-* proponents liked to say, "This new web-based technology will be so much simpler than that crufty old CORBA
by twoodfin 13y ago
Was that really an accident? I know many of the WS-* proponents liked to say, "This new web-based technology will be so much simpler than that crufty old CORBA junk." But in many cases it was the same companies with the same agendas doing the design and standardization work, so it's not too surprising that the result was more or less bound to go down the path of CORBA. The main difference, and of course the main motivation, was a protocol that would run on port 80 and have a chance to be "web-routable" through firewalls.
- projectileboy 13y agoThat's a really good point. Certainly the product vendors had the same motivations. But at the time I was often disappointed when I listened to the conversations of developers I worked with, because I rarely heard anyone draw parallels between the two. It was frustrating to work on projects where we'd be six months in and people would be surprised that the ORBs - er, I mean web service platforms - had difficulties talking to one another.
- spullara 13y agoIt wasn't just the product vendors. The people on the two specs were also the same. WS-* was literally the ex-CORBA contributors reimplementing all the same stuff.