I found this discussion from Sanjiva Weerawarana in the Software Development Times which discusses in plain language the differences between WS-* and REST for web services.
Personally I've got to say I fall down on the WS-* side: once you try to do anything even slightly complex (security, reliable messaging, distributed transactions, even just setting policy) with REST web services then you're going to need to recreate the functionality which the WS-* standards specify - as Sanjiva points out you're just going to end up with REST-*. It seems, er, overenthusiastic to re-invent these standards again for the REST platform.
I think to a large degree it boils down to the business model: if it's "give away the web services for free and make money elsewhere" then REST has a place. If, however, your web services need to be secure, licenced, billable and subject to QoS obligations then WS-* is the platform to use.
Information disclosed in this community becomes public.
Exercise caution when deciding to disclose your personal information.
HP reserves the right, but is not obligated to, edit or remove your comment if it contains personally identifiable information or other content HP deems unacceptable.
Opinions expressed are your personal opinions or those of the original authors, and not of HP.
Please see HP's web Terms of Use for more details.
