Let’s all become cavemen


I just came across a statement made by a prominent industry figure about how WS-* is becoming so complex that it is not practical to implement a WS-* architecture with no tool/stack support. Well, what’s wrong with relying on tools/stacks? Isn’t that how humans have made progress? That is, a specialized few focus on a complex area and produce a useful package that can be used by others in tackling completely different complexity etc. Does a construction engineer have to understand the inner workings of all construction tools? Seems to me that if we start eschewing tools as a principal, we will all end up more or less cavemen. I’d rather use tools.

Comments (6)

  1. damien morton says:

    If a clear and simple standard, designed (amongst other things) to reduce the number of tools required, becomese so complex than a tool is required to manage the complexity of the standard, then it has likely failed.

  2. Uwe Keim says:

    Maybe the author of the statement sees a "humanly-understandable" technology move into something complex and is complaining about the missing simplicity that was so sexy about the original architecture?

  3. I’m assuming you mean that when we had just SOAP things were comparatively clear and simple. Well, you can still build apps today and into the foreseeable future using just SOAP. I think of SOAP as the basic versatile wrench. No one is taking that away. But some people want more advanced technologies to help them solve problems they encounter in building their business apps. WS-* technologies are aimed at that. The idea is that you use only what you need. Because the problems are often hard, the solutions end up being more complex than say just plain SOAP. But the tools/stacks are supposed to abstract that complexity and make it easier to deal with.

  4. Peter da Silva says:

    Over the years I’ve found myself over and over again left out on a limb when some company discontinued or changed some component that I was depending on, so I had to go back and either re-implement it, or modify my code to remove the dependency, or to use an alternate tool. It doesn’t matter what the platform is, UNIX, Windows, Mac, or embedded systems, if you can eliminate a dependency you eliminate an opportunity for the f-up fairy to show up.

    BTW, you have a problem with your CSS in this page. It probably looks OK in IE because of the way IE expands enclosing boxes, but in other browsers div#centercontent is overlaid by div.footer and so the .Text and ASP.net buttons are sitting right on top of Yasser Sohoud’s message.

  5. Yasser, See following URL’s for an example of standards work getting stuck because of tools support:

    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrf/200411/threads.html#00011

    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrf/200411/threads.html#00000

    Problem is tools are not yet ready for those on the bleeding edge.

    thanks,

    dims

  6. If the statement I came across was "stack/tool support for WS-* sucks today and needs to improve significantly before it’s widely adopted" I would’ve completely bought that. I agree that stacks/tools have a loong way to go. I disagree with the principal that relying on stacks/tools is evil.