|
From: Sean M. <sea...@pr...> - 2002-07-24 09:36:40
|
At 10:11 24/07/2002 +0100, Bill de h=D3ra wrote: >As for orchestration, if orchestration means ordering a set of >functions, that implies either a scripting language or a way to declare >dependencies a la make. The WS* specs can call it what they like, but >they'll deliver one or the other. I think this standardised approach to orchestration (if it happens) will be= the real advance out of the whole Web Services thing. There is always a tension between declarative and imperative syntaxes (read= =20 "xml" or "scripting language") for orchestration. If you push too far towards XML you end up with XML based programming=20 languages. This is a well worn path and the results are not generally terribly well received. For=20 example MID from the SGML days is the earliest one I can remember. Basically as soon as you= =20 add a tag called <if> or <choice> of <while>, you are on a slippery slope to=20 re-inventing yet another (bad) programming language. On the other hand, if you go too far the other way, everything gets buried= =20 in code :-/. Whats needed in a hybrid approach I think. Historically Javascript has= served as an imperative environment embedded in markup (e.g. web browsers). Much as= I dislike Javascript I would prefer to be able to use it to express "if x >=20 y" rather than use tags for it. Sooner or later,the world will realise that the ideal answer simply involves declaring Python to be *the* universal, embeddable, platform neutral OO scripting language. <grin/> Sean |