ApacheCon EU talks
January 28th, 2007Much to my surprise, it seems that somehow I managed to get two talks accepted to ApacheCon EU (May 1-4) this year. The best part is that they're on completely different sides of the spectrum.
The first talk is Navigating WS-death^H^H^H^H^H*. (It seems not everyone liked the name, so that may be changed - feel free to give feedback in the comments). There are many WS specs out there with many different versions (like WS-Addressing). When should I as a user consider using them? What benefits will they bestow on my project? How interoperable is a particular specification? What does the spec roadmap look like?
The second is entitled Building scalable, reliable, and secure RESTful services. This talk is intended to be practical advice on how to build RESTful services. I am to illustrate scalability, reliability, and security through a series of practical examples using different toolkits/frameworks.
Hope to see many of you in Amsterdam this year, I'm sure it'll be a great time!
January 28th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Ah Amsterdam. I saw Phish play there when I was cool. Both times I have been there (been years now) I eagerly anticipate my visit. For whatever reason, however, after 2 days I am overridden with a desperation to get to the train station and get the heck out of there. Looks like good talks - good time of year to get out of Graps.
January 28th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
I like WS death *. Just last week I heard the phrase for the first time, at the CodeMash conference in Ohio. Its funny, and it creates a little controversy which is always fun. Not that we need more WS controversy. Hmm.. maybe a WS-controversy spec is in order.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
I like the name and I think you should wear a Darth Vader Helmet while you give your talk.
Congrats on being selected to speak twice.
January 29th, 2007 at 9:21 am
It wasn’t at all that I didn’t like the name. It’s that I didn’t get it. What I asked was, “will people know what this means?” because it means precisely nothing to me.
If folks know what it means, and come to the talk as a result, it’s a good name. If it’s cute just to be cute, and people avoid it because they don’t know what it means, it’s a bad name. I have no context for determining which is the case, even after having it explained to me what the name meant. I didn’t really want to know what it meant. I wanted to know if the target audience would know what it means. These are rather different questions.
–Rich
January 29th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Rich: Ah, I see, thats a good point. I didn’t quite pick that up from the context of the comment on my proposal. Maybe a better variation would be “WS-(death?)*: Navigating web service standards” or something along those lines. Will ponder and see if I can come up with something better.