Alex Hoffman

Perspective on development, management and technology

Syndication

News

    Subscribe

    IASA Member

Confusing Web Services?

Discussing service oriented architectures with a number of developers recently, made me realize that there is real confusion about how an ASP.NET XML Web Service should be implemented architecturally.

Many appeared to think that somehow business logic should be implemented in the Web Service, which would be serviced by the data tier, with one or more presentation layers consuming the service.

Why think this?

The answer is that that's what most articles and examples tend to show. Most show business logic being performed in a service method. Admittedly, it is often shown that way in order to show how to consume an XML Web Service, but does soat the cost of the bigger picture.

Surely examples should more correctly show a Web Service acting as an interface to business logic. Business logic that is serviced by the data tier and ifapplicable, enterprise services. Business logic which is generally represented directly through a presentation layer.

Published Saturday, April 12, 2003 2:17 AM by Alex Hoffman

Comments

# re: Confusing Web Services?@ Thursday, April 10, 2003 5:42 PM

I'm not sure I totally understand what you're getting at.
Can you clarify a bit?

Are you saying that WebServices should just be wrappers for exposing existing business logic? Or that WebServices are not necessary? Or something totally different?

Tim Marman

# re: Confusing Web Services?@ Thursday, April 10, 2003 5:56 PM

Alex - hooray. Marcie and I were talking about that last night. People are really mixing web services up with dcom.
I noticed you have the msdn architecture stuff on your links. I wish that was the home page of msdn! Everyone should read that stuff first.

julie

# re: Confusing Web Services?@ Thursday, April 10, 2003 6:33 PM

Good topic.

An SOA is about exposing some logic, business or otherwise, to a universal messaging bus. To that end, it doesn't matter from the SOA level how each service is implemented (dcom, asmx, remoting, java, script, whatever).

The UMB may be more than just over an http transport. SMTP, msmq are players as well. Who knows, maybe we'll be pulling soap messages over rss soon - everything else is going rss ;).

Upcoming and current products from various vendors support this flexibility. Web Service fronts for SQL Server, Analysis Services, BizTalk. And one of the coolest features in XP and W2k3, one click SOAP publishing of DCOM services

Anyway, just some thoughts. Keep this discussion going. We all need to learn more about the possibilities in the SOA space beyond our current RPC-like web services.

drew

# re: Confusing Web Services?@ Thursday, April 10, 2003 6:50 PM

Tim,

What I am saying is that a Web Service should expose the functionality contained in an application's program (business) logic rather than implement the logic itself.

In that way, it represents an interface to the underlying functionality of an application.

Does that help - please let me know if this isn't clear.

Alex Hoffman

# re: Confusing Web Services?@ Thursday, April 10, 2003 11:43 PM

Yes, ok - I kind of thought that's what you were getting at, but I wasn't sure. In that case, I agree with you 100%.

It's the perfect scenario for reuse. Take some existing business logic and provide yet another way for others to consume it.

We've done similar stuff with COM components in the past (before the days of SOAP) - exposing them through some generic ASP page that provides an XML-over-HTTP interface to various consumers. One of the only significant differences there was the format of the message.

Tim Marman

# WebService Usage : HumanCompiler@ Friday, April 11, 2003 11:17 AM

WebService Usage : HumanCompiler

TrackBack

# web services are not MTS / dcom etc : Julia Lerman Blog@ Friday, April 11, 2003 11:17 AM

web services are not MTS / dcom etc : Julia Lerman Blog

TrackBack

# WebService Usage : Vibro.NET@ Friday, April 11, 2003 11:17 AM

WebService Usage : Vibro.NET

TrackBack