Comments on: North and South http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/ Longer than a blog; shorter than a book Sun, 07 Sep 2008 18:03:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: networkscale.loosecoupling.org » Blog Archive » Elliote and David… Korean War vs. the XML War http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-271540 networkscale.loosecoupling.org » Blog Archive » Elliote and David… Korean War vs. the XML War Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:08:48 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-271540 [...] them on my sleeve, and this analogy really cracked me up… some interesting comments as well. The Cafes » North and South : The analogy isn’t as silly as it sounds either. North Korean/Soviet style “communism” fails [...] [...] them on my sleeve, and this analogy really cracked me up… some interesting comments as well. The Cafes » North and South : The analogy isn’t as silly as it sounds either. North Korean/Soviet style “communism” fails [...]

]]> By: Farialima http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-133227 Farialima Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:44:52 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-133227 Nice comparison. Difficult not to think of the 1984 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8 ad... Especially seeing the involvement of IBM in the WS-* stack. Nice comparison. Difficult not to think of the 1984 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8 ad… Especially seeing the involvement of IBM in the WS-* stack.

]]> By: The Cave » Blog Archive » REST vs. WS-*: War is Over http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-125529 The Cave » Blog Archive » REST vs. WS-*: War is Over Mon, 03 Sep 2007 14:59:44 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-125529 [...] took up Chapelle’s comparison of the REST/WS* debates to the Korean conflict, writing in North and South, that the analogy is quite apt: Take it one step further though. WS-* is North Korea and REST is [...] [...] took up Chapelle’s comparison of the REST/WS* debates to the Korean conflict, writing in North and South, that the analogy is quite apt: Take it one step further though. WS-* is North Korea and REST is [...]

]]> By: James Peckham http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-124591 James Peckham Fri, 31 Aug 2007 20:18:54 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-124591 There is water, there is milk and by god we'll drink both depending on the situation. There is water, there is milk and by god we’ll drink both depending on the situation.

]]> By: A Reader http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110971 A Reader Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:08:17 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110971 Gee, gotta love religious wars, especially when the religions are still evolving.... But seriously folks, something simpler than either approach is needed. I'm a developer/part-time manager being bombarded by 100+ methods of programming "best practices," languages, IDEs, COTS/Open Source products, not to mention distributed processing protocols. Do I really have the time to be intelligent on any of these subjects? No. I also have upper-level managers (who can't be bothered to understand it themselves) asking which way to go. Can I give them a good answer? No. So what do we end up choosing? The protocol (or whatever) which is currently "the most supported." Unfortunately that usually means "the one which has the approval of some big organization (OMG, W3C, etc.) and has the most transparent multi-vendor support." So, when you get right down to decision time, which one gets chosen? In reality, I simply don't care as long as I can use it until I get forced into using something else. Sorry to say this, but (for me) the "war" is over and has been for some time. Yes, I may be implementing something inefficiently, but in the real world, time seems to be more important than efficiency. So now I'll ask my question: What ever happened to creating a single, simple API (not like Java 5's 3200+ classes with at least 3 different ways to do I/O) that can be used forever and in any language, while the protocols are changed "behind the scenes" to make everything more efficient? That way, the operating system and network folks can play with the hardware and protocols to their hearts desire while leaving something stable for the rest of us to program to.... Gee, gotta love religious wars, especially when the religions are still evolving….

But seriously folks, something simpler than either approach is needed. I’m a developer/part-time manager being bombarded by 100+ methods of programming “best practices,” languages, IDEs, COTS/Open Source products, not to mention distributed processing protocols. Do I really have the time to be intelligent on any of these subjects? No. I also have upper-level managers (who can’t be bothered to understand it themselves) asking which way to go. Can I give them a good answer? No. So what do we end up choosing? The protocol (or whatever) which is currently “the most supported.” Unfortunately that usually means “the one which has the approval of some big organization (OMG, W3C, etc.) and has the most transparent multi-vendor support.” So, when you get right down to decision time, which one gets chosen? In reality, I simply don’t care as long as I can use it until I get forced into using something else. Sorry to say this, but (for me) the “war” is over and has been for some time. Yes, I may be implementing something inefficiently, but in the real world, time seems to be more important than efficiency.

So now I’ll ask my question: What ever happened to creating a single, simple API (not like Java 5’s 3200+ classes with at least 3 different ways to do I/O) that can be used forever and in any language, while the protocols are changed “behind the scenes” to make everything more efficient? That way, the operating system and network folks can play with the hardware and protocols to their hearts desire while leaving something stable for the rest of us to program to….

]]> By: paul walk’s weblog » Blog Archive » The 38th parallel http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110644 paul walk’s weblog » Blog Archive » The 38th parallel Sun, 15 Jul 2007 09:23:25 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110644 [...] Elliotte Rusty Harold extends David’s ‘Korean War’ metaphor, to suggest that “WS-* is North Korea and [...] [...] Elliotte Rusty Harold extends David’s ‘Korean War’ metaphor, to suggest that “WS-* is North Korea and [...]

]]> By: Dilip http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110517 Dilip Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:53:47 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110517 Ted Neward has a follow up: http://blogs.tedneward.com/2007/07/14/The+Korean+Conflict+And+Why+SOAP+And+REST+Were+Never+A+Quotwarquot.aspx Ted Neward has a follow up:
http://blogs.tedneward.com/2007/07/14/The+Korean+Conflict+And+Why+SOAP+And+REST+Were+Never+A+Quotwarquot.aspx

]]> By: Laurent Szyster http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110084 Laurent Szyster Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:57:07 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110084 Convergence? Indeed. WS-* and the misunderstanding of XML-RPC as Representational State Transfer are both going down the drain. The new kid on the block is named JSON and it is quickly replacing XML as *the* object serialization protocol for network peers. Why? Because it *is* an object notation not some misapplied text markup language, because it suites dynamic languages and because it is at least one order of magnitude less verbose and faster to handle than SOAP. Google already dropped support for WS-*, others will sooner or later follow the leadership. Of course the "enterprise" dummies will cling on their BS-* along the lines of "Why make it simple and fast when you can make it infuckingcredibly complicated and slow?" Convergence?

Indeed.

WS-* and the misunderstanding of XML-RPC as Representational State Transfer are both going down the drain.

The new kid on the block is named JSON and it is quickly replacing XML as *the* object serialization protocol for network peers. Why? Because it *is* an object notation not some misapplied text markup language, because it suites dynamic languages and because it is at least one order of magnitude less verbose and faster to handle than SOAP.

Google already dropped support for WS-*, others will sooner or later follow the leadership.

Of course the “enterprise” dummies will cling on their BS-* along the lines of “Why make it simple and fast when you can make it infuckingcredibly complicated and slow?”

]]> By: William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » Gutting the SOAP processing model http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110039 William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » Gutting the SOAP processing model Fri, 13 Jul 2007 05:32:09 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-110039 [...] But the little guys shouldn’t be trusted with headers. They’d poke their eyes out. Or, as Elliotte Rusty Harold recently wrote (on a related topic, namely WS-* versus REST), “developers have to be told what to do and [...] [...] But the little guys shouldn’t be trusted with headers. They’d poke their eyes out. Or, as Elliotte Rusty Harold recently wrote (on a related topic, namely WS-* versus REST), “developers have to be told what to do and [...]

]]> By: Allen Halsey http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-109969 Allen Halsey Fri, 13 Jul 2007 01:30:18 +0000 http://cafe.elharo.com/xml/north-and-south/#comment-109969 <blockquote>The war ended in a truce rather than crushing victory for one side–it’s Korea, not World War II.</blockquote> The Korean war did not end in truce. In fact, it never ended: <blockquote>"... a cease-fire was established on July 27, 1953 .... No peace treaty has been signed to date, technically leaving the North and South Korea at war." --- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia:Korean_War</a></blockquote>

The war ended in a truce rather than crushing victory for one side–it’s Korea, not World War II.

The Korean war did not end in truce. In fact, it never ended:

“… a cease-fire was established on July 27, 1953 …. No peace treaty has been signed to date, technically leaving the North and South Korea at war.”
— Wikipedia:Korean_War

]]>