tags:

views:

288

answers:

5

Are people still writing SOAP services or is it a technology that has passed its architectural shelf life? Are people returning to binary formats?

+5  A: 

The alternative to SOAP is not binary formats.

I think you're seeing a surge in the desire to leave the complexities of WS-* behind in favor of REST and JSON, because they're much simpler to use and don't require frameworks to be used successfully. The problems that WS-* ostensibly tries to solve aren't problems for most users, but they have to pay for the complexity any way.

Brad Wilson
+3  A: 
erickson
I think one of the benefits of REST is that there are no solid standards beyond HTTP. The reason WS-* is both bloated and easy-to-use is that everything is standardized, so it solves everyone's problem. REST fills a different niche by keeping itself "custom".
Tom
+2  A: 

I wouldn't consider SOAP legacy at all. REST vs. SOAP is really just the continuation of the debate of COM/CORBA vs. HTTP POST/GET etc. SOAP is nothing more than an updated version of the same principles defined with C and C (contracts, providers, consumers etc.). It's just that has appeared to SOAP succeed (at least partially) where the other two failed (and it could be that SOAP just has a better marketing team), that is that SOAP really does allow to different systems to connect rather easily compared to it's predecessors. That being said, it still suffers from the same drawbacks that COM/CORBA did...it can get really complex.

I think REST is just coming back into style at the moment. It's nothing new, people are just taking another look at it. Look at the web. It's REST and it's been around for years. 5 years from now people are going to look back and say the same thing about it being legacy and the need to change. It's the nature of software development. Everything goes in cycles.

The debate about which one is better is going to be just like the tabs vs. spaces debate. There are going to be people on different sides swearing that one is better. Really in the end, they both accomplish the same goal. Sure one will be a better solution than the other in some situations, but in the end neither will be superior 100% of the time.

Kevin
+2  A: 

I think so. RESTful solutions are more and more sensible for the vast majority of use cases; the complexities of SOAP and other RPC technologies just aren't worth the effort anymore.

conmulligan
+1  A: 

We were using SOAP, but since we control both messaging endpoints (thick client out on the web connecting to our servers) we decided that the "lingua franca" of XML wasn't offering any real benefit. Instead, we're experimenting with binary serialization via Google protocol buffers, and like everything we've learned so far. It's somewhat CORBA-esque, but doesn't make me grumpy the way CORBA did. Still haven't found the best fit for the RPC layer, but pretty sure the payload will be protocol buffers.

The point I'm trying to make is that if you control both sides of the conversation, there are significant efficiency advantages in bypassing the XML tax.

maxfurni