[capidl] Re: [E-Lang] Concerning XML docs
Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:21:50 -0400
> [Sorry if this is inappropriate for e-lang. Please let me know.]
> Ben Laurie wrote:
> > "Jonathan S. Shapiro" wrote:
> > > 2. If it becomes useful to do RPC exchange with XML-based applications,
> > > XML-RPC may become an important de-facto exchange standard.
> > Can we say SOAP?
> Actually the word I hear from various open source hackers (e.g. advogato.org)
> and from my little brother who implemented both XML-RPC and SOAP interfaces for
> Mojo Nation is that SOAP provides too many features, some of which are
> unneeded, that the spec is still too unstable. It may be a case of the
> simpler, dumber, earlier solution beating out the technically improved one.
> (E.g. the way that C is still preferred over C++ by most open source hackers.)
> Or it may not. Perhaps SOAP will mature quickly and perhaps the industry
> support for SOAP will carry some weight.
> But for, e.g. my upcoming Mojo Nation API , which is aimed more at open
> source hackers than at buzzword-compliant industrial policymakers, we are
> definitely using XML-RPC instead of SOAP. (And, actually we are also providing
> a C API front-end that does RPC to the backend over XML-RPC. My guess is that
> the C API front-end will prove more popular than the actual SOAP protocol...)
>  rough draft:
> e-lang mailing list