Friday, January 18, 2008 at 01:12 PM

Help! The WS-* vs. REST Debate Has Been Hijacked By People Who Want To Have Logical Discussions About Actual Real World Issues!

A call to arms.

theregister.co.uk / Thursday, February 21, 2008 at 03:55 AM

IBM Web services guru predicts WSDL future

From 2002: “On this latter specification, Sutor is emphatic: web services are defined by whether they are described in WSDL.”

bitworking.org / Friday, January 18, 2008 at 06:00 PM

Do we need WADL?

Ka-pow!

25hoursaday.com / Thursday, January 17, 2008 at 07:01 AM

Myth: RESTful Web Services Don't Need an Interface Definition Language

Dare weighs in on the usefulness of description languages in REST-based design and seems to conclude that Uniform Interface != Description Language and that simple discovery ( style) is the appropriate comparison.

steve.vinoski.net / Monday, January 14, 2008 at 05:29 AM

Lying Through Their Teeth: Easy vs. Simple

Steve Vinoski compares IDL as used w/ CORBA/DCOM with WSDL as used by WS-*. It’s interesting that IDL served as more than just a description for machines. Humans used IDL as spec text and built services accordingly, just like REST :)

addsimplicity.com / Sunday, January 07, 2007 at 11:59 PM

WSDL - Why Services Don't Launch [addsimplicity.com]

Oh snap!