Thursday, April 25, 2002

Ok, now that my inbox is starting to fill up, I felt the need to clarify my position on this whole Groove Edge Services shindig.  Thanks for listening! 2:15:04 PM    comment []

I have a watch that is my wireless bicycle computer, can tell me cadence, speed and heart rate.  I haven't upgraded to Polar's new model that can tell me altitude and how many watts each leg is producing, oh, and can infrared to my PC and graph it all - hey it's only about $700.  And now these guys have put the Palm OS in a watch.  At some point these tiny devices get too tiny and we reach a point of diminishing returns on usefulness, no?  I wonder what kind of games I could run on that watch... 10:01:15 AM    comment []

Ed Dumbill writes: "SOAP as commonly practiced offers nothing in the way of compatibility with HTML, XSLT, RDF, XLink, or SVG. In addition, it is responsible for the promotion of non-standard URNs (e.g. urn:GoogleSearch), collapses all the resources of an endpoint behind one URI, and uses HTTP in a way that most experts think is highly inappropriate. The "web" in "web services" is contemptible." I guess I don't understand the complaint.  What does compatibility with html mean?  I do agree that SOAP over HTTP is not the best suited task for some things, but for client/server interactions where you want to request some data, rather than pre-formatted HTML, SOAP is totally the right way to do it.  It defines data structures, and procedures for accessing data.  And the last statement kind of depends on what you think the "web" is.  I see SOAP over HTTP as a good evolutionary step that will get a lot of people using SOAP quickly, but I'm definitely running into limitations when trying to map this binding to an asynchronous P2P application.  Kind of feels like I'm forcing a square peg into a round hole.   9:26:18 AM    comment []