Comparing the "Economics" of REST and RPC

Roy T. Fielding
Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:03:51 -0700

I've done so a dozen times already on the fork list.  Look at the archive if
you want a rehash of past history.  I can't type fast enough to keep up with
the BS being spread about Web Services, so I'd rather spend the time working
on my alternative.


On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 02:09:55PM -0700, David Orchard wrote:
> If you're going to criticize us lemmings, provide an alternative or 
> justification instead of telling us how stupid we are.  Honey, not vinegar.
> I'm a builder of real Internet systems that people depend upon for business 
> as well, and probably a lot of other people around are as well.  What would 
> be helpful is specific reasons for your beliefs.  You alluded to things 
> like interface versioning in other messages, and you mention dependencies 
> in this message.  You regularly write theses, etc. so I was wondering if 
> you had any documentation or collection of documentation/emails/whatever 
> that fleshed out your position.
> As a person who has regularly spoken against the hype of XML/Web Services = 
> swarms of self-healing autonomous smart services (or the ilk), I think we 
> might share a common view, though I'm interested in understanding your 
> specific reasons.  I typically point to inconsistencies in the overall 
> deployment of Web/XML systems in my criticisms, such as: 1) how do firewall 
> admins deal with SOAP/HTTP; 2) XML/XSLT etc. was not really design for 
> server/application-centric computing; 3) XML itself isn't even finished, 
> what's the processing model? 4) why are there 4 data models for XML? 5) How 
> does a system deal with XML from end-to-end, etc
> Cheers,
> Dave Orchard
> XML Architect, Jamcracker
> On Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:29 PM, Roy T. Fielding 
> [] wrote:
> > > We're certainly moving towards XML for control representation in a big 
> way.
> > >  I don't know of a significant or sincere alternative to SOAP et al.
> >
> > Lemmings do that too.
> >
> > > Does your REST work cover why you hold this belief?
> >
> > No, REST is an architectural style -- it does not dictate protocol 
> syntax.
> >
> > I hold that belief because I spend a lot of time building real Internet
> > services that people depend on for business.  XML introduces hundreds of
> > hidden dependencies within an integrated system that can be seen when
> > you do performance profiles and protocol traces.  That can be managed
> > within an application context, but not within a transfer context.
> >
> > ....Roy