Boy, you said it. I tried to upvote, but I guess commenting kills my upvote.
Fing "Enterprise". Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life here.
IBM and Microsoft drop the SOAP, and we get stuck picking it up. I hate* implementing SOAP clients for random SOAP server implementation of the day..
I'm sorry, Rob will be back shortly. We apologize for the outburst :-)
...
Boy, you NAILED it exactly, though.
REST sure seems simpler: define the document/content types, or schema, and just use links to GET things. Save POST for the few things that actually change state, then document carefully how the content is to be sent back up.
It turns out a good deal of services really are READ-ONLY anyway.
Making the simple things simple: give me my damn document! Let's keep it encrypted, and I'll prove I'm authorized to see it:
Fing "Enterprise". Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life here.
IBM and Microsoft drop the SOAP, and we get stuck picking it up. I hate* implementing SOAP clients for random SOAP server implementation of the day..
I'm sorry, Rob will be back shortly. We apologize for the outburst :-) ...
Boy, you NAILED it exactly, though.
REST sure seems simpler: define the document/content types, or schema, and just use links to GET things. Save POST for the few things that actually change state, then document carefully how the content is to be sent back up.
It turns out a good deal of services really are READ-ONLY anyway.
Making the simple things simple: give me my damn document! Let's keep it encrypted, and I'll prove I'm authorized to see it:
https:/acme.com/service?acct=xxx&pass=yyy&item_key=123 ... Content: binary/what-you-wanted blah blah blah...
Painfully easy vs just freaking painful tweaking of SOAP nonsense. Die, SOAP, die!