in reply to soap?

The reason people recommended SOAP is that it is the currently the best XML command server available. You should go to SOAPlite for the quickest server implementation I have ever seen anywhere.

So to answer your points:

bikeNomad got so many votes because he gave a good answer.

SOAP is the right answer

I can't believe you can implement a XML client-server combo in less lines than I can do one with SOAPlite. If you can, post it here and I promise I'll spend the next month upvoting all of your posts.

If you also manage to make it interoperable with MS COMs, implement C and Python libraries, and provide a abstract transport layer that allows communication over TCP/IP, email and other goodies like that., I'll drop at your feet.

Until then, check out SOAPlite.

____________________
Jeremy
I didn't believe in evil until I dated it.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: soap?
by jettero (Monsignor) on Jul 25, 2001 at 18:32 UTC
    Well, I certainly don't need all of that. That's my point. I just want a gpg wrapper around some xml data that I trade back and forth. I've got apache running anyway, and the client stuff is going to be a java application.

    So, none of the features you've listed here actually help me. I think I understand now in fact. You're imagining something quite a bit more complicated than I am. So, minus all these features you've listed, I'm bettin' my cute little XML::Parser "server" (CGI) was quite a bit faster to code, since I didn't have to learn anything.

    You guys have me convinced though... I'm readin' more and more about SOAP, and I'll be sittin around thinkin' of a project to use it on. This isn't the one, but there'll be one soon! It's really neat... I think.

    mitd's post 99566 way down at the bottom was the real clincher here.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom