Why it _shouldn't_ be SOAP?

It's a perfectly fine protocol, with a rigid schema and mature code generation support for all relevant languages. It's not the sexiest protocol, but it gets the job done.

And what are the alternatives? JSON schema?

▲

justinclift an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> mature code generation support for all relevant languages.

Heh, "relevant languages" is kind of an interesting term there. If the relevant language is Java then sure, it's fine.

Some popular modern languages (ie Go) don't have good SOAP support (yet). At least not to the point of being able to point them at WSDL/XSD specs and have everything auto-generated. :(

▲

ivan_gammel an hour ago | parent [-]

I think that‘s a matter of days and few hundred dollars in tokens to port it to Go if you really need it. Porting is where AI can do a really good job with the right instructions.

	▲	justinclift 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, kind of. It's more than just a few days of effort though. Sme of the members of my team at work have been working on adding SOAP 1.1 support. It's a significant amount of time and effort though.

▲

coredev_ an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the biggest problems with SOAP was the implementations, never the standard. WCF...

▲

userbinator an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And what are the alternatives? JSON schema?

ASN.1? It's even more mature, and the de-facto DER/BER encoding is far more efficient to generate and parse than anything XML-based.

▲

anticensor an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

An adaptation of PEPPOL (also XML, but at least standardised)?

▲

clhodapp an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It's based on XML and XML is a cursed format, because it does not cleanly separate parsing from evaluation. Because of this flaw, whatever words they want to use, it does not have real schemas, it has programs and a validator-evaluator, which performs network IO.