[exprla-devel] Re: Output mechanisms: SOAP intro

[reid_spencer <ras...@re...>]

--- In xpl-dev@y..., "Michael Lauzon" <ce940@f...> wrote:
Like Kurt, I don't like SOAP...but that may be just me not fully 
liking anything Macrohard comes out with anymore.  :)  We could build 
our own (which is probably not the best idea at this point) or like 
RAH said, modify them.  I for one, haven't fully read up on SOAP, 
WorldOS, or BXXP (though the last one is still being built and 
documented).  

Michael



--- In xpl@e..., "Richard Anthony Hein" <935551@i...> wrote:
> I agree with your views on transparency of SOAP within the XPL 
framework
> 100%, Kurt.
> 
> How much of this will be handled by XPL processes, and how much by 
the
> transport protocol?  WorldOS, or BXXP - (if it becomes opensource)?
 
Or we
> can take the best of both and modify WorldOS - Lucas, what's your 
opinion on
> this?
> 
> Richard A. Hein
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cagle@o... [mailto:cagle@o...]
> Sent: July 7, 2000 12:51 PM
> To: xpl@e...
> Subject: Re: [xpl] Output mechanisms: SOAP intro
> 
> 
>   My primary misgivings with SOAP have more to do with their use as 
an
> interface into COM components and less as a messaging protocol
(it's 
pretty
> good in that respect), and then, as mentioned, primarily because of
> 1)security, 2) pushing of a procedural model into the declarative 
space of
> distributed applications, but the latter is just a personal bias.
> 
>   I would also point out that as far as interoperability goes, the 
SOAP
> message should be largely transparent to XPL users -- it should be 
generated
> and consumed by the XPL framework, not explicitly written by the
XPL 
users
> themselves. This is analogous to something like Visual Basic, where 
the
> complexity of COM is largely hidden behind the language framework
of 
Visual
> Basic. Thus an XPL object class would handle the eventing through 
SOAP
> mechanisms, but you as an XPL developer would never see these 
messages --
> you'd just write event handlers for intercepting them and rely on 
the
> framework to send the event messages to you.
> 
>   -- Kurt
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: Richard Anthony Hein
>     To: xpl@e...
>     Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 9:11 AM
>     Subject: RE: [xpl] Output mechanisms: SOAP intro
> 
> 
>     Jonathan,
> 
>     Certainly SOAP is powerful.  Plus it's getting worked on by
many 
groups,
> including the Apache XML project.  I have no problems with SOAP,
and 
it
> would be my first choice at this point.  However, let's not confuse 
the
> issue with XSL.  XSL isn't for components to communicate.  SOAP and 
XML-RPC
> are.  Whatever the standard accepted by the community will be, and
I 
am
> betting on SOAP at this point, we should use of course.  SOAP will 
allow XPL
> to talk to CORBA, COM and Java Beans.  It also will facilitate 
communication
> between XPL objects if necessary, but I am not sure it will be.  
Then again,
> if we want COM, Beans, and CORBA to talk to XPL objects, then yes, 
it will
> have to be wrapped in standard "envelopes" such as SOAP.
> 
>     So, in the XPL programming context, making a SOAP envelope 
should be
> simple as possible.  Some people however, have expressed concern 
over the
> fact that SOAP requires that you make the document root of your 
document the
> SOAP envelope.  Some people think that this degrades the document, 
by
> requiring actual changes to the document.  Mind you, when the raw 
document
> is packaged in the SOAP env. it's only then that it has to have 
changes,
> then when it's opened on the receiving end you should be able to 
strip off
> the envelope and have the normal document.  So I am not sure why 
there is so
> much concern about this.
> 
>     Kurt's misgivings are understandable.  How can we facilitate a 
security
> model to protect against improper usage of the local objects?  I am 
hoping
> that this issue is resolved soon before SOAP is widely accepted.  
But I am
> certain it can be overcome.  In the meantime, what should we do?  
Wait,
> build a security model for XPL usage of SOAP, dump SOAP, or just 
trust it
> will all be OK?
> 
>     This question needs to be addressed before we start talking 
about how we
> are going to facilitate communication between heterogeneous objects.
> 
>     Richard A. Hein
>       -----Original Message-----
>       From: me@m... [mailto:me@m...]On
> Behalf Of Jonathan Burns
>       Sent: July 7, 2000 10:28 AM
>       To: xpl@e...
>       Subject: [xpl] Output mechanisms: SOAP intro
> 
> 
> 
>       Back a couple of threads ago, Richard and I were debating XPL
> Requirements for output
>       mechanisms or formats. XSL? Remote Procedure Calls?
>       I mentioned SOAP partly because Kurt had expressed misgivings 
that it
> was TOO
>       powerful, providing access to local objects.
> 
>       Anyway, I've just found this nicely-written  introduction ,
on 
the
> Microsoft developers'
>       network site.
> 
>       The bottom line seems to be, that whatever will receive an 
http POST
> message can
>       be addressed via SOAP, and quite simply.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Jonathan Burns; saski@w...
>         To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       xpl-unsubscribe@o...
> 
> 
> 
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     xpl-unsubscribe@o...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> --
> 
> 
> 
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> --
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   xpl-unsubscribe@o...
--- End forwarded message ---