Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

djberg96 (2603)

  (email not shown publicly)

Journal of djberg96 (2603)

Thursday June 10, 2004
12:50 PM


[ #19183 ]
I've asked this on IRC before and Dave Winer's brief comment on the subject made me want to ask here: what advantage does SOAP have over XML-RPC? The latter seems so much easier to me.

/me knows little about SOAP, btw.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • SOAP is cleaner.

    Sorry. I actually don't know. Someone knowledgeable will undoubtedly explain at some point...


    You are what you think.
  • RPC is easier, but more limited in what it can do (i.e. SOAP can do RPC, but RPC can not necessarily do SOAP, and RPC was born out of an early draft of SOAP). If RPC works for you, go for it. Though I think SOAP is supported by more environments (e.g. .NET), so if that's a concern, then you'll probably have to go that way.
  • SOAP is a general purpose, object-oriented messaging protocol. It's XML message can be passed through a number of protocols. It is highly generic and allows users to specify new datatypes.

    XML-RPC is a narrowly defined RPC mechanism that defines around 10 data types (only about 3 are needed [string, array, struct]), specifies the transport mechanism (HTTP), and has no provisions for user-defined extensions.

    I have worked with both in several languages, including Perl, Python, PHP, Java, and C. For those

  • XMLRPC is a Whiner controlled technology, SOAP is not - I know what I choose.

    I decided a long time ago that I am not using anything that Whiner is part of, and that makes me sleep better at night!