We're today using a REST-like access method on a server application, to return XML data from a database.
This is completely proprietary, but now we're getting requests to integrate this with "some or another" client application, like report generators and such, used by customers.

Does anyone have a suggestion for the most "integratable" approach for a very simple web service implementation that preferrably uses REST access.
I'm not at all updated on the status of REST support in "a normal web service aware client" -- like a report generator or a data mining data collector or similar "of the shelf applications"

REST may be described to such clients with WADL or WSDL2.0, right?
Or should some other method be used, to make it easy for customers to use their existing clients/tools to request data from our simple web service.

The actual web service itself is dead simple. The input is a date range and the output is an XML document with a record set containing data on customer orders, relating to the date range.

One solution would be to implement a real SOAP web service, but I'd prefer to do not use any third party server applications, and coding a SOAP server from scratch does not sound very easy.
Instead, I'd like to adjust the existing REST-like implementation that we already have made ourselves.

The questions is -- what is the most simple approach to do just that?
Any experience on that kind of "absolutely very most simple way to implement a web service" protocol-wise?
Perhaps somebody already has done such, and can give an example of a WADL or WSDL2 spec (or any other) that describes a similar service, usable by "many types of clients"?


asked 02/08/2011 06:42

stefanlennerbrant's gravatar image

stefanlennerbrant ♦♦

2 Answers:
You can use WSDL2 to describe a REST Service to a great extent but still I feel it misses out few aspects.

Details :

WADL is surely a better way but yet not widely accepted.

People (Rest Guys) say that a REST Service doesn't need a description like SOAP based ones, but I think you atleast need to provide all possible information to the client like mime types etc.

As such you say that your service is purely depended on XML types, hence you can choose WSDL 2 approch.
shivaspk's gravatar image


Good enough -- this is the same conclusion that I've come to myself trying to read on the subject.

The link suggested is one of many, but it's one of the better ones:-)

stefanlennerbrant's gravatar image


Your answer
[hide preview]

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments



Asked: 02/08/2011 06:42

Seen: 399 times

Last updated: 02/22/2011 09:15