advertisement

Weblog:   Web Services, Weblogs and the Future.
Subject:   XML-RPC battles
Date:   2003-05-23 14:11:19
From:   anonymous2
It seems to me that people want something that is as easy to implement and use as XML-RPC, but they want it extensible and UTF-aware. The original author of XML-RPC spec has declared his unwillingness to revise the spec.


Does this situation strike anyone else as being remarkably parallel to the circumstances surrounding RSS?


In the end, people are going to make extensions to XML-RPC whether Winer likes it or not. The only question at that point is what to call the result -- XML-RPC 2.0, XML-RPCng, or something entirely different.


Standards that become superceded by advances in technology are no longer standard. They become evolutionary dead-ends. Standards that evolve with the changing needs of users last longer.


In other words, feel free to get over yourselves, and just do the right thing.
Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 5 of 5.

  • XML-RPC battles
    2003-05-26 15:35:34  anonymous2 [Reply | View]

    Dear Anonymous, go forth and innovate. Just don't call it XML-RPC and everyone should be happy.

    To Timothy, dive in a little deeper into the MetaWeblog API. It is based on RSS 2.0. It's exactly what you want. Or put it another way, what more do you want?

    Dave Winer
    • Timothy Appnel photo XML-RPC battles
      2003-05-26 16:59:04  Timothy Appnel | O'Reilly Blogger [Reply | View]

      I would begin with the first point in my post -- international character support. How would you provide it in a frozen specification that explicitly states strings to be ASCII?
      • XML-RPC battles
        2003-05-27 18:48:41  anonymous2 [Reply | View]

        Read the archive of the XML-RPC mail list. This issue comes up regularly. I get tired of doing repeat performances. XML-RPC is so deployed it just can't be changed, not by anyone. If you do a little digging you'll see how other smart people have dealt with this issue. I've given my opinion more than once. Dave
        • XML-RPC battles
          2003-05-28 18:44:30  anonymous2 [Reply | View]

          I'll agree there.

          I took a good look at it once.

          I had to ask myself what XML-RPC really was.

          Basically, XML-RPC is a Remote Procedure Call.

          You pass variables, you get variables back, or an error.
        • Timothy Appnel photo Smart implementation of international character support?
          2003-05-28 01:23:22  Timothy Appnel | O'Reilly Blogger [Reply | View]

          I'm aware of these workarounds. As I've noted there are a number of different solutions including breaking from the specification to support UTF8. I would be curious to hear what users working with languages that don't fit into ASCII think.

          There are different degrees of smart. Smart workarounds. Yes. Smart implementation of international character support. No.

          "XML-RPC is so deployed it just can't be changed, not by anyone."

          This is at the heart of my point. If XML-RPC cannot be evolved then indeed it is not the right thing for a publishing API to go forward with.
Showing messages 1 through 5 of 5.