[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [bcm] Web Services and Process definitions
Bruce, We are going to have to send you in for some re-education! RESTful is passe - its now called http-binding. Jean-Jacques issued a huge rant this week on BPSS list - vis this topic. Basically - how do I put this politely? - http-binding isn't worth squat when it comes to reliable stateful business interactions. You have no way of verifying anything happened, that anyone got anything, nor what state a process has reached. Apart from that - its great!! ; -) JJ was actually recounting his e-banking experience with a major bank - and his credit-card bill and their use of webpages and emails - same grab-bag. The bank *thinks* this is all reliable messaging services - when in fact its not. And they don't care - because they just apply late charges anyway!! So - http-binding - and its just fine for things like query to registry - information pull - but be very careful otherwise... Cheers, DW. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Peat" <BPeat@eProcessSolutions.com> To: <bcm@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 10:58 PM Subject: Re: [bcm] Web Services and Process definitions > I prefer RESTful services myself - simpler. > > - Bruce > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <nwasserman@adaptiveservices.com> > To: <MIKE.LUBASH@DFAS.MIL>; <bcm@lists.oasis-open.org> > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 4:58 PM > Subject: RE: [bcm] Web Services and Process definitions > > > I think it's important to distinguish web service, as a technical means to > capture loosely coupled, encapsulated interactive components, from business > services or business service components, which can be delivered with a > number of different vehicles (automated on the web, outsourced, human). > Since web service has become embedded as a term of art for the automated > vehicle, I don't think it's wise to change its usage. > > For the technical web service, loose coupling works. But for the business > service interaction, it may be useful to think of the service in terms of > "rich coupling", by which I mean that the service can respond to a complex > set of information characterizing the needs of the service recipient. > There may be differing degrees in the "richness" of the coupling. Using a > biological metaphor, not all organs have to be equally adaptive to the > outside environment. Likewise, some service components may be specialized > to support interaction with complex service recipients like human beings. > Other service components can get by with less rich interactive > capabilities, such as those that deal with standard databases, and > communications protocols. In between these poles would be service > components such as semantic brokers. Not to make things too complicated, > maybe there is a spectrum of interactivity with "process" at the procedural > end and "service" at the service-recipient-oriented end. > > Neil > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the > OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/bcm/members/leave_workgroup.php. > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/bcm/members/leave_workgroup.php. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]