|
With all of the PPC and Smart Phone development going on I find it insane that the Compact Framework doesn't take advantage of WSE 3.0.
There are a few options available to us, like http://opennetcf.org/ which just released beta1 of their library Smart Device Framework (SDF) 2.0. But why isn't Microsoft providing us with the tools we need to use their tools?
I posted to two Microsoft forums ( Here and Here) for feedback, but I just got pointed to OpenNETCF. If Microsoft is going to make use depend on third parties for secure communication when using web services on smart devices, they should start getting involved with those third parties and put together some samples on how to use them correctly.
The CF team works very closely with OpenNETCF. All the major code owners on
OpenNETCF are NETCF MVPs.
Thanks for the info. We had one team going down the Vista route, but they
were stopped short when they were told by MS that they had no idea how long
it would be before CF and or Mobile would be ready for WCF.
The have "channels" in Indigo that encapsulate the WS* protocols, so no
worries on that front. Officially, MS will support WSE also moving forward,
but I am assuming there won't be much innovation in that space. MS will
promote the use of Indigo in its stead ... and I *do* think Indigo is the
way to go if you are going to be writing apps on the desktop that avail of
the WS* protocols.
Geez, what a bad place to be. Now I recall why it is called Bleeding-edge
technology... we are certainly bleeding...
This is great feedback ... if you have more complaints forward them to me.
I would like to compile these and address them seriously for upcoming
releases.
I have reponded to what I am looking for here:
We're working on the right level of WS-* support. Sadly, it didn't get done
for V2.
We did a fair amount of work for SDF 2.0 in the WSE area, but that was
almost exclusively due to changes in what CF 2.0 provides. WSE in SDF 1.x
wasn't an exact duplicate of the FFX, and we used all internal encryption
stuff. CF 2.0 added a lot of encryption support, so where applicable we
ripped ours out and used theirs, assuming that theirs is likely tested
better than ours.