http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/224 IT management in a changing IT world Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:34:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/224#comment-51077 William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » CMIS, APP, Zen-SOAP and WS-KitchenSink: some data points Thu, 11 Sep 2008 08:23:29 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=224#comment-51077 [...] “who needs XPath fragment-level PUT?”, I tried to make the case that the use of XPath in WS-RT to do fine-grained updates is a case of [...] [...] “who needs XPath fragment-level PUT?”, I tried to make the case that the use of XPath in WS-RT to do fine-grained updates is a case of [...]

]]> http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/224#comment-46743 William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » WS Resource Access at W3C: the good, the bad and the ugly Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:59:33 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=224#comment-46743 [...] The bad is the whole “resource access” spin. It is not actually intrinsically bad. There are scenarios where such a pattern actually fits. But the way that pattern is being addressed by WS-RT and friends is overly generalized and overly XML-centric. By the latter I mean that it takes XML from an agreed-upon on-the-wire interchange format to an implicit metamodel (e.g. it assumes not just that you agree to exchange XML-formated data but that your model and your business logic are organized and implemented around an XML representation of the domain, which is a much more constraining requirement). I could go on and on about this, especially the use of XPath in the PUT operation. In fact I did go on and on with it, but I spun that off as a separate entry. [...] [...] The bad is the whole “resource access” spin. It is not actually intrinsically bad. There are scenarios where such a pattern actually fits. But the way that pattern is being addressed by WS-RT and friends is overly generalized and overly XML-centric. By the latter I mean that it takes XML from an agreed-upon on-the-wire interchange format to an implicit metamodel (e.g. it assumes not just that you agree to exchange XML-formated data but that your model and your business logic are organized and implemented around an XML representation of the domain, which is a much more constraining requirement). I could go on and on about this, especially the use of XPath in the PUT operation. In fact I did go on and on with it, but I spun that off as a separate entry. [...]

]]>