When I first saw this it looked great: a ruby REST wrapper which supports a lot of useful test and integration possibilities. However, the deeper I looked, the more disappointed I became. I’m now saddened to believe that this is based on yet another misunderstanding of what REST is.
As far as I can tell, the ActiveResource concept, on which this approach is based, is merely an attempt to impose a constrained CRUD data-model over HTTP. There is no concept of content negotiation - all data is XML according to pre-assumed schemas. There is no support for automatic discovery and use of hrefs between resources. There is even the suggestion that it’s a good idea to casually extend the HTTP protocol with extra custom methods.
All of these are typical problems found in projects which use the name REST without the key bits which make it really work. The end result is just another fragile, application-specific RPC protocol. Sigh.
nutrun » Blog Archive » Testing web services with ActiveResource
I don’t need to say much about this one. Re-implementing a clumsy version of HTTP on top of SOAP seems somewhat crazy.
mnot’s Web log: The WS-Empire Strikes Back… feebly
A potentially interesting, although buzzword-laden, article about the benefits of setting up and using simulations to determine how complex integrated applications will behave. Needs some links to more detailed discussions, though.
Technology News: IT Management: Network Simulation and Emulation: Try It Before You Deploy It
A relatively simple, but still interesting, article about the issues faced by distributed architectures .
InfoQ: Opinion: Multiple Processor Computing Challenges go Beyond Purely Technical Issues
One of the key tenets of the Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) approach to software system design is the idea of loose coupling. In some cases it is pragmatically obvious whether one service is loosely or tightly coupled to another, but in the general case it can be tricky to determine. With that in mind InfoQ have produced an article on the topic.
InfoQ: Loose Coupling in SOA Defined
It looks like several people are actively trying to pin down the much-bandied term “cloud computing”, and in particular, to define what it is not.
InfoQ: Defining Cloud Computing
It seems as if the term SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture) has become confused with the implementation technology (often WS-* web services). Some pundits are now trying to create a new term “WOA” (Web-Oriented Architecture) to describe a service-oriented approach using native web technologies such as HTTP, URLs and REST.
ZapThink have taken a look at these terms and their implications: WOA is Me - Another Acronym? WOA and SOA
I can’t decide if this is a good idea, or a bizarre attempt at box-ticking. An alphabet soup of acronyms to try and merge the laid-back world of REST with the world of business process workflow.
InfoQ: WfXML-R: REST based process integration
Jeff Atwood goes off on a rant about XML and a whole bunch of commenters chip-in. I particularly like “Ant makes me cry.” 
Coding Horror: XML: The Angle Bracket Tax