best approach to web-service/api - web-services

This is sort of a generalized question.
What is the best possible solution/strategy/technique/technology to create an HTTP API/web-service using PHP + MySQL, which can be called from any platform - web (html), Flash, Mobile etc. - that supports call to web services or API.
I am going to develop this API/web-service primarily for games (they will be called from games being played on any platform), so speed, scalability and security - all are highly significant factors.
How to choose from SOAP, REST, XML-RPC etc. ?
Any idea about ready-made solutions that can help fulfill my requirement ?
Thanks

In this case I'd recommend a REST API. SOAP is a more complicated standard, and it makes it more difficult for those to interface to your API (for example, some PHP servers don't have SOAP enabled). As far as using PHP and MySQL to create a REST API, you can use something like Zend Rest Server to make the process easy.

Related

What is the difference between a Web-Service and a Application-Service

This might be a silly question on this site, but I want to learn more about it.
Being in the Software Engineering field, I have come to know that it's useful to get acquainted with Web-Services. I am trying to understand it. To do so, I must know the difference between a Web-Service and a Application-Service in simple terms.
I have heard about SOAP & REST Services.
For a newbie like me, its overwhelming to understand these concepts when I search them in Google.
How to understand these things better and in what order?
I think it's a great and simple question which usually confuses most of developers. What is Application Service and what is web Service?
Web service is a common term which you can find easily on the internet. Although some time they cross each others boundaries but here is a simplest explanation I can think of:
Application service or Application Layer is an abstraction layer reserved for communications protocols and methods designed for process-to-process communications. Application layer protocols use the underlying transport layer protocols to establish host-to-host connections.
Some time you can also use Application Service to define method calls within your application.
WebService: Any application or method which can be accessed by web is a Webservice. You can also say: anything available on the web is WebService.
There are three common web service architectures:
RESTful resource-oriented,
RPC-style e.g. SOAP
REST-RPC hybrid. 90% of the web sites use this unknowingly e.g. http://mysite.com/get/pictures?tag=birthday :)

Design interoperable web services

I'm designing a set of web services to allow our clients to connect from their apps to one of our systems. Our clients have their apps developed in all varieties of frameworks (.NET, Java, PHP, Python and even the occasional all JS app), so obviously WS is the way to go.
Investigating a little about truly interop WS I've found that the way to go is to design first the WSDL and XSD and derive the implementations from there.
What i'm really looking for is guidance if this is really the way to go. I've read that WCF creates interoperable WS but i'm not a fan of MS creating something standard.
Should i use WCF or there is a good set of tools for designing WSDL and XSD without the pain i'm expecting.
Thanks in advance
If you want to interoperate with JavaScript, then best to make more of a REST style API. This is basically just standard HTTP calls, so you're interopable from the get-go. However, you've kindof indicated that you want to use SOAP, so ...
If you're going with SOAP/WSDL, I'd definitely advocate using the server platform - yes, even .NET - to generate the WSDL, then simply check that the options you're using are producing a good, interopable WSDL.
I'm a Java developer with a history of PHP & Perl, and I've interoperated with .Net on a number of WS projects, from both sides of the coin (as server and client). There's usually no major problems - just be wary of a couple of things:
certain proprietary elements that MS
mixes in with the open standards. For
example, they may offer NTLM-style
authentication, which really isn't
needed in most use cases,
particularly when you're using SSL
certificates.
SOAP has taken a few
different forms over the years
(Document/Literal, RPC/Encoded, ...)
you'll probably find you don't need
to worry about this, as RPC/Encoded
died along with old frameworks, and
most modern frameworks tend towards
Document/Literal
SOAP offers a few
bolt-on standards (e.g. MTOM & DIME
for attachments, and SOAP-WS for
authentication). Try to avoid those
bolt-ons, as different platforms
implement different subsets.
For security, I'd advise to use SSL for
the trust & confidentiality, and then
either HTTP basic auth, or simply custom
string tokens in your soap request definition.
Just keep the WSDL as minimal as possible, try interoperating quite early in the process, and you shouldn't have too many problems
You can use WCF and contract-first development.
If interoperability is the main concern then I would recommend using WCF to provide the service implementation but instead of relying on WCF to generate the service interface to use contract-first development to model the interface.
A really good article on how to develop this way is Schema-based Development with Windows Communication Foundation.
If you are going to roll your own WSDL and schemas you are probably going to want to get an editor like XmlSpy or LiquidXml. I like the price of LiquidXML (free!) but I can't recall if you have to pay for the web service features.
Another interesting tool for contract-first development with Visual Studio and WCF is WSCF.blue. I haven't used it but it does appear to be actively developed based on the WCSF.blue roadmap.
WSDL and XSD are language independent, you just have to have some mechanism to communicate using other languages. Good thing for you to do would be IMHO core data design, so you would not need so many XSD for the same data entities.
I'm not sure what you mean when you ask "should I use WCF"? WCF is the current mechanism for developing web services (and other kinds of communicating services) on .NET. There is no other current mechanism. The others are obsolete, or else considered "legacy technology".

Web Service solutions from Mac

Trying to find a way to rapidly develop web services on the Mac Server platform that will be served via Apache and need to be able to write to flat files or SQL Lite on the Mac.
We have .net, ObjC, C++, Python, and Java skills. We have done lots of web service work before on Windows and will probably go with Azure when we build out the product.
Our development server is on Mac OSX 10.5.8 and we are on a tight time and cost budget to get a prototype done for a small beta group (< than 500 transactions per day) that we can later rework.
We are thinking SOAP, possibly REST. Not sure what is available for Mac?
Any help appreciated // :)
If you are developing a service, you must have some idea what clients you are trying to serve. If those clients expect to talk to a SOAP service, you'll need SOAP. If you are just serving JavaScript code-in-a-browser, REST is probably sufficient.
Apache CXF, being 100% Open Source Java, can be used to build REST or SOAP services on MacOS or anywhere else. There are, of course, other options.
What about Ruby on Rails? Easy to deploy, runs great on the Mac - and is trivial to setup RESTful web services for.
If you dont need all the magic of Rails, the other (albeit) Ruby option would be to use Sinatra - I would challenge anyone to find a RESTful webservices library easier to use than that - its so elegant and so easy. I am primarilly a .Net developer, but I picked up Ruby and Sinatra in a heartbeat.
In either case, I would stay away from SOAP - In my opinion it's just too inflexible these days. In a web 2.0 world of live internet APIs making the webservices RESTful is the easier, faster (and smaller) option. We used to use SOAP exclusively where I work, but the reality is that it just doesnt deliever in the same way that REST does. With the accessibility of JSON and XML serialization frameworks out for any languge even the object passing is trivial. SOAP is harder to scale, is harder to test, uses more bandwidth and is not as flexible. Not everything can talk SOAP (out of the box), but tell me something that cant do a HTTP request?

Ideal Web Service Framework for Security and Interoperability

I'm beginning a project right now that will require a pretty extensive web back end. Of the different calling conventions, we have found that the easier and more cost effective approach is to build a standard SOAP web service.
So now, we are in the process of looking at the different web service frameworks in order to determine which will meet the business needs:
Security
Cost
Time
I've only worked with WCF, which I was fairly content with, but I would like to explore all other options before I make a definite decision. In your experience, what do you feel is the best web service framework?
Web Services Interoperability Technology (Java)?
WCF (.NET)?
ActionWebService (Ruby)?
On a side note, we need a framework that can securely be accessed via iPhones, Windows Mobile Devices, and Blackberries.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Chris
WCF can be used to make both SOAP and RESTful Web Services. Interoperability is guaranteed as long as you stick to standards. But the more standards you put on it, less platform can catch up. In that sense REST on Basic Auth over https would be very light weight. Also see WS-I Basic Profile. Java vs .NET would be matter of taste, I think. WCF is not perfect, but it mostly seems to do the job.
One thing to consider about WCF is that it has a very rich extensibility model. Anything it doesn't do out of the box, you can teach it to do, with little or no change to your basic service.

Document or RPC based web services

My gut feel is that document based web services are preferred in practice - is this other peoples experience? Are they easier to support? (I noted that SharePoint uses Any for the "document type" in its WSDL interface, I guess that makes it Document based).
Also - are people offering both WSDL and Rest type services now for the same functionality? WSDL is popular for code generation, but for front ends like PHP and Rails they seem to prefer rest.
Document versus RPC is only a question if you are using SOAP Web Services which require a service description (WSDL). RESTful web services do not not use WSDL because the service can't be described by it, and the feeling is that REST is simpler and easier to understand. Some people have proposed WADL as a way to describe REST services.
Languages like Python, Ruby and PHP make it easier to work with REST. the WSDL is used to generate C# code (a web service proxy) that can be easily called from a static language. This happens when you add a Service Reference or Web Reference in Visual Studio.
Whether you provide SOAP or REST services depends on your user population. Whether the services are to be used over the internet or just inside your organization affects your choice. SOAP may have some features (WS-* standards) that work well for B2B or internal use, but suck for an internet service.
Document/literal versus RPC for SOAP services are described on this IBM DevelopWorks article. Document/literal is generally considered the best to use in terms of interoperability (Java to .NET etc). As to whether it is easier to support, that depends on your circumstances. My personal view is that people tend to make this stuff more complicated than it needs to be, and REST's simpler approach is superior.
As mentioned it is better to choose the Document Literal over RPC encoded whenever possible.
It is true that the old java libraries (Axis1, Glue and other prehistoric stuff) support only RPC encoded, however in today's most modern Java SOAP libs just does not support it (e.x. AXIS2, XFire, CXF).
Therefore try to expose RPC encoded service only if you know that you need to deal with a consumer that can not do better. But then again maybe just XML RPC could help for these legacy implementations.
BiranLy's answer is excellent. I would just like to add that document-vs-RPC can come down to implementation issues as well. We have found Microsoft to be Document-preferring, while our Java-based libraries were RPC-based. Whatever you choose, make sure you know what other potential clients will assume as well.