5 ms·

Web 3.0 Will Be All About Web Services. Learn How to Create them

7 points by basdog22 17y ago

pedalpete 17y ago
I wish this article would describe why to use SOAP. I was under the impression that SOAP was a fairly dead technology. Particularly as we move to PUSH services with PubSubHub or the RSS version (I forget what it's called).
- chris24 17y ago
  The RSS real-time technology is called RSSCloud: http://rsscloud.org/ http://rsscloud.org/
  - jsdalton 17y ago
    Pubsubhub and RSS cloud are "competing" approaches to real time notifications.
- chunkyslink 17y ago
  I couldnt agree more ... "Web 3.0 will be all about RESTful webservices"
- btakita 17y ago
  SOAP is dead for good reason. Its an overcomplicated POS. I will pretty much refuse (unless there is no other alternative) to use a web service that only supports SOAP. My conspiracy theory regarding SOAP is that major tool vendors support it because you need a complicated and expensive tool to design a SOAP service.
  - basdog22 17y ago
    ..because you need a complicated and expensive tool to design a SOAP service... huh? Don't think so. Can you please give some more info about your opinion? My SOAP services was always easier to implement than others like XML-RPC for example. Never found anything complicated about SOAP.
    - btakita 17y ago
      > Can you please give some more info about your opinion? Visual Studio web services generates some befuddling code, at least when I last used it about 5 years ago. Maybe things are better now? Also, it is difficult to implement a good SOAP library. For example, in the Ruby world, there is soap4r, which has difficulties talking to EJB SOAP and .NET SOAP, which have different conventions. I had to interop with a .NET soap service, and it was pretty painful. > My SOAP services was always easier to implement than others like XML-RPC for example. Never found anything complicated about SOAP. Good for you. You must be smart. I find REST much easier and straightforward. I never bothered learning the SOAP protocol, which doesn't make me very sad for some reason.
- kaitnieks 17y ago
  Besides if you do need something like SOAP but without the unnecessary overcomplications you always have XML-RPC (http://www.xmlrpc.com/ http://www.xmlrpc.com/) which I use a lot.
- cmars232 17y ago
  Agreed. I had to check the date on this article to make sure it was really from 2009, and not 4 years ago.
mark_l_watson 17y ago
SOAP is so 20th century :-) Seriously, a long time ago I implemented SOAP for a commercial J2EE product, and used SOAP, but I don't use it anymore. Good riddance - REST style is easier to support and use. I just wrote a book for APress on Web 3.0, and my pitch was that it is more about publishing and reusing data.

7 points by basdog22 17y ago

I wish this article would describe why to use SOAP. I was under the impression that SOAP was a fairly dead technology. Particularly as we move to PUSH services with PubSubHub or the RSS version (I forget what it's called).

chris24 17y ago
The RSS real-time technology is called RSSCloud: http://rsscloud.org/ http://rsscloud.org/
- jsdalton 17y ago
  Pubsubhub and RSS cloud are "competing" approaches to real time notifications.
chunkyslink 17y ago
I couldnt agree more ... "Web 3.0 will be all about RESTful webservices"
btakita 17y ago
SOAP is dead for good reason. Its an overcomplicated POS. I will pretty much refuse (unless there is no other alternative) to use a web service that only supports SOAP. My conspiracy theory regarding SOAP is that major tool vendors support it because you need a complicated and expensive tool to design a SOAP service.
- basdog22 17y ago
  ..because you need a complicated and expensive tool to design a SOAP service... huh? Don't think so. Can you please give some more info about your opinion? My SOAP services was always easier to implement than others like XML-RPC for example. Never found anything complicated about SOAP.
  - btakita 17y ago
    > Can you please give some more info about your opinion? Visual Studio web services generates some befuddling code, at least when I last used it about 5 years ago. Maybe things are better now? Also, it is difficult to implement a good SOAP library. For example, in the Ruby world, there is soap4r, which has difficulties talking to EJB SOAP and .NET SOAP, which have different conventions. I had to interop with a .NET soap service, and it was pretty painful. > My SOAP services was always easier to implement than others like XML-RPC for example. Never found anything complicated about SOAP. Good for you. You must be smart. I find REST much easier and straightforward. I never bothered learning the SOAP protocol, which doesn't make me very sad for some reason.
kaitnieks 17y ago
Besides if you do need something like SOAP but without the unnecessary overcomplications you always have XML-RPC (http://www.xmlrpc.com/ http://www.xmlrpc.com/) which I use a lot.
cmars232 17y ago
Agreed. I had to check the date on this article to make sure it was really from 2009, and not 4 years ago.

mark_l_watson 17y ago

SOAP is so 20th century :-) Seriously, a long time ago I implemented SOAP for a commercial J2EE product, and used SOAP, but I don't use it anymore. Good riddance - REST style is easier to support and use. I just wrote a book for APress on Web 3.0, and my pitch was that it is more about publishing and reusing data.