He he he 🙂 I saw this post on messaging and events (via Jim) and I was amused. The chapter we wrote almost 1 1/2 years ago for a book on service-orientation (I think the book should be published soon) dealt with exactly this approach. In fact, in there we talked about the importance of designing message-oriented contracts and proposed a programming model abstraction that is different from today’s Web Services middleware. In our proposed middleware, the receipt of a message was represented by an event. SSDL was still an idea in the making then. So it was only natural to follow those ideas when we started experimenting with SSDL-related tooling. The code generated by the SSDL contract tool models incoming messages as events.
We explicitly ignored the XML-to-object problem (we assumed that we could go from one to another) because we wanted to concentrate on the principles of messaging. There is no reason why one couldn’t treat messages as plain XML documents rather than typed objects. One could argue in fact that processing plain XML documents or at most have a message abstraction is the way to program such systems.
This is nothing new. Messaging folks have been doing it for ages. It’s the discussion within the context of service-orientation that is interesting so I am glad that more and more believe the truth.
Last week, I wrote about the evolution of the CVOYA Graph. After a lot of…
Last year, I released the "Graph Model" library for .NET as an open source project. It…
Today I'm pushing Spring Voyage out of the harbor. You can track its journey on…
In my last post, I wrote that "the typing of code was parallelized and delegated.…
In February, I wrote about the small team I'd stood up instead of hiring humans:…
Assembling a dream team without a single hire I've been making great progress on CVOYA's…