SOAP duds!

Finally a project which really warrants use of SOAP, hmm… not really XML-RPC would have worked but SOAP-RPC has got better future scalability. I was pleased that I was able to set up a service which returned a custom made image – The downside is that the whole thing is returned base64 encoded instead of a pure image stream but what the heck bandwidth and computing power is cheap and anyone intending to run a service which can be consumed by ASP/JSP/PERL uniformly better have lots of bandwidth and computing power.

To jumpstart my team with SOAP I started to write an idiot’s guide of sorts but then I stumbled on this URL https://www.soapware.org/bdg it is a wee bit dated but just the thing which will get you going.

It goes without saying that my SOAP server and client both are written in … … YES! PHP!!

  • It looks very promising.
    The new google API is also based on SOAP.

    What kind of stuff are you using it for ??

    • For the test run I created the server using the SOAP class by Manuel (phpclasses.org) Lemos, the client is the SOAP client found in PEAR but I will probably write my own client class which does not rely on PEAR

  • Dont see any difference between XML-RPC and SOAP

    • For all practical purposes when the XML in XML-RPC confirms to SOAP format it is SOAP-RPC 😉
      Everything else is the evil hype from M$

      • kvk

        What “evil hype from M$”? AFAIK, SOAP specification is under the control of the W3 working group comprising of IBM, HP, Ariba, SAP and many others — not just Microsoft.

        • Exactly – the hype is that SOAP == M$ .NET == Web Services

          • kvk

            Hmm, the original postings never mentioned .NET, but only SOAP and XML-RPC — thus my comment 😉

            Where exactly is the hype that “SOAP == .NET”? If I go to the MS .NET site, I can’t even see SOAP being mentioned anywhere on the index page.

            • Do you think that the suits at M$ are so naive and juvenile – dig a bit deeper.

              https://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2000/May00/SoapW3CPR.asp

              Read the subtle messages in the small press release above and here

              https://news.com.com/2100-1001-231478.html?legacy=cnet

              To quote – “Microsoft has developed a new technology for exchanging information over the Web that could give the software giant an advantage over Sun Microsystems, IBM, and other competitors if adopted by a standards body.” – LOL

              finally STFW for SOAP + Microsoft + News

              • kvk

                Huh? Those articles are 2 years old, for chrissake. .NET has come a long way since then. If you’d look at the W3 SOAP site, you’d get this link – https://www.w3.org/Submission/2000/05/. See under the heading “Declaration of Microsoft Corporation:”. Then try to think what they could possibly gain by making SOAP an _open standard_.

                Again my question stands, where do you see that “SOAP == .NET”?

                My understanding is that .NET is much more than SOAP. But then again, I don’t profess any knowledge about web services other than plain-speak articles about the same (f.e. CNET). All I know is that there is lot of new technology involved with it. Especially C#, CLR related. That’s all I’m interested in. Probably, Joel’s last week’s column would explain things to you in a better manner.

                I definitely agree that MS is not naive. But they do have good business acumen, as history has shown us.

                Finally, I am neither a MS bigot nor a Linux/Free software/Opensource/*BSD bigot. I just happen to like good technology 🙂

                • Well atleast for me your post answers all your questions as well

                  And then there are enough articles to prove the point as well

                  Ignoring the law of transitivity let me put it this way
                  .NET == Web Services == SOAP was the picture that M$ has always sought to give, the truth notwithstanding.

                  OTOH – you must be pretty smart to read through all the FUD and still get a clear picture.

                  • kvk

                    I don’t see any FUD at all. So maybe, I’m pretty dumb 😉

  • Bandwidth is cheap? 🙂

    Hi tarique,
    I read something about bandwidth being cheap. You referring to bandwidth in India? Any pointers? 🙂

    • Re: Bandwidth is cheap? 🙂

      Nope! I am not refering to India.