[Standards] Re: Feedback on I/O Object Forms

Egon Willighagen egon.willighagen at gmail.com
Sat Mar 17 11:42:52 UTC 2007

Ryan wrote:
> On Friday 16 March 2007 03:35, Julian Kölle wrote:
> > Exactly. In addition to that XML-RPC is very limited in what data types
> > it supports (the reason why SOAP was invented).
> So ah, why not use SOAP over XMPP? You can use whatever data-encoding
> system you like (ie XML-schema), and I've yet to see anything that prevents
> async SOAP messages.

Because all existing SOAP library are too heavy weight, and, as a result, all 
implementing libraries mutually incompatible; if your SOAP library (Axis 
1.x/2.0) does not match the implementation version of the service, then you 
can forget any working communication.

Therefore, we propose a much simpler specification following the KISS 
principles, so that implementing libraries can actually implement the full 
specification. SOAP over HTTP was just the example in the webservice concept, 
and a horrible prototype in my experience with these technologies.

SOAP over XMPP is already better, but still suffers from the lack of a library 
implementing the full specification.


e.willighagen at science.ru.nl
Cologne University Bioinformatics Center (CUBIC)
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
GPG: 1024D/D6336BA6

More information about the Standards mailing list