“I have the damnedest time posting comments to your blog. 2nd try.”

Tell me what’s up – your first comment went through moderation, this one has gone straight through – let me know, I’ll fit it. Email me on dan ^at^ dancres ^dot^ org.

“And, should the W3C put renewed emphasis behind REST, wouldn’t that raise awareness, at the very least, of this style of systems design…………………….Or, maybe, the W3C doesn’t matter anymore. ”

Well, I think the W3C matters but the question is to whom? I have a suspicion that W3C is seen by most to be about “Web stuff” and so the enterprisey’s ignore it. Hence the whole “REST isn’t suitable for the enterprise” excuse. REST is basically coming from the wrong party – were REST to be out of IBM or Sun or BEA or the JCP I suspect there’d be a lot more traction.

So, I suspect that W3C putting extra emphasis on REST will help little as most enterprisey’s are focused elsewhere buying the WS-* stacks because they look a lot like what they’re used to. They would claim they’re thinking outside the box but we know different.

Very sad…….

“Do you feel the W3C should ever have been involved in the effort?”

Well, the W3C is a lot of things these days, so I suppose there’s room to work on any number of technologies. However, if the W3C were to remain true to its name and founding principles, then no. As soon as it became apparent that web services were not of the web, in fact break the web, they should have stopped. But that’s water under the bridge. It’s not the first time that someone went down the wrong road.

The larger point is this. The W3C imprimatur on the SOAP/WSDL (as well as addressing, policy, etc.) standards is important. What happens if, as Nick calls for, the W3C removes their backing? Are these things still standards? Will corporate IT and ISVs continue to move forward with SOAP/WS-*? Wouldn’t enterprise customers, rightly or wrongly, see this as a slight towards the effectiveness of this technology. And, should the W3C put renewed emphasis behind REST, wouldn’t that raise awareness, at the very least, of this style of systems design.

Or, maybe, the W3C doesn’t matter anymore.

“……….since “web” services have nothing to do with the Web, then the World Wide Web Consortium should have nothing to do with web services. That’s huge.”

Yep, in the name of balanced reporting I should’ve drawn some attention to this as well but, is it huge? Do you feel the W3C should ever have been involved in the effort? I think it’s big that W3C is maybe moving on but I think it’s even bigger to consider how much effort they and others have wasted on a not-so-giant step forward?

Oooooh string….

What was I saying again?

Agreed tho’ I think many an architect or developer is just as much a problem because they continue to get excited about technology. Either they allow themselves to be washed away by hype or they consider the tech in isolation of any meaningful business problem.

But seriously anyone who is saying that WS-* is a massive leap is missing the point. The reason they are a step forward is that people are agreeing on interface, communication and integration standards in a way that hasn’t happened before. 802.11x isn’t a revolution but its market impact has been.

The technology isn’t important, it doesn’t even have to be good, its about its ability to make a market impact. The problem is that people keep pushing technology rather than trying to push the value.