SOAP Problems

Python XML SIG <>

Problems with SOAP?    (1807)

Growing consensus that it's no good    (1811)

References: (Feb 12, 2002)

Too big    (2271)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

"Neither fish nor fowl"    (2280)

References: (Feb 13, 2002), (Feb 13, 2002)

Hard to implement interoperably    (2289)

References: (Feb 13, 2002), (Feb 13, 2002), (Feb 13, 2002)

soapbuilders community disagrees    (2653)

Valid?    (2705)

Uche's out-of-box experience    (2710)

Uche couldn't get SOAP packages working out-of-the-box with well-known SOAP services.

Still a new spec    (2740)

Won't succeed on Internet    (2301)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Not human readable    (2306)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Security issues    (2329)

Mapping XML elements to language types in the message is bad    (2363)

RPC tunnels over firewalls    (2371)

Too many optional features    (2336)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Makes no statement about underlying protocol    (2348)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Nothing new to contribute    (2531)

Just another RPC (except with hierarchically extensible headers).
References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Conflates transport and payload details    (2541)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Data types are hacks    (2550)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

Inefficient    (2558)

References: (Feb 13, 2002)

XML Schema can't describe SOAP RPC Encoding    (3307)

References: (Feb 15, 2002)

References?    (2565)

Clay Shirky's article    (2570)

SOAP != Web Services    (2662)

Alternatives?    (1956)

XML-RPC    (1836)

Satisifies 80/20 rule    (1844)

Easy to use from many languages    (2134)

Including statically typed languages like C. This is true of SOAP as well.

ASCII only    (1860)

True?    (1880)

XML-RPC can contain anything that XML can    (1886)

No rigorous spec, so impossible to know    (1916)

Only valid type for string element is ASCII    (1928)

Spec seems to imply that any valid XML is okay for strings    (1948)

ASCII requirement widely ignored    (2126)

Iain Colledge's proposed Unicode enhancement    (1939)

Sketchy datatyping    (1864)

Relevant?    (1896)

Outside of 80 percent rule    (1901)

Flexible datatypes key to solving complex problems using RPC    (1908)

No support for None    (1873)

Silly definition of float    (1969)

Bloated to the point of obfuscation    (1976)

No way of inlining XML    (1983)

Can't cache calls without side effects    (2005)

This is a scaling issue.

Scaling issue?    (2019)

Want to scale, don't use RPC    (2025)

What is meant by "RPC?"    (2033)

Roy Fielding's definition    (2041)

"What distinguishes RPC from other forms of network-based application communication is the notion of invoking a procedure on the remote machine, wherein the protocol identifies the procedure and passes it a fixed set of parameters, and then waits for the answer to be supplied within a return message using the same interface. Remote method invocation (RMI) is similar, except that the procedure is identified as an {object, method} tuple rather than a service procedure."

Network interactions as procedure calls    (2052)

Great for ease-of-use    (2066)

Scaling problems    (2071)

XPC    (1995)

REST    (2081)

Not much harder than XML-RPC    (2090)

API is on the wire    (2099)

Client doesn't even need thin interface layer.