The first approach sounds like throwing the SOA baby out with the bath water, is that correct?
The first approach is to re-architect your application from scratch and keep only the service and data backend of your SOA. The other approach is to choose a framework that allows you to have a distributed architecture and allows you to retain some of the application and UI logic on the server side if you wish to. So you’re focused on the second approach? Yes, because the second option brings the benefits of the first option. You can still have the logic run on the client side, but the framework also supports retaining some of the logic on the server side. So the second option is a superset of the first one. For architects and developers looking to include RIA/Web 2.0 capabilities to their existing SOA applications, why is the second choice the better one in your opinion? The second one is better because you can keep the investment that you have made in your current application, in your current architecture. For example, if you are using JavaServer Pages, JSP, you have the option of ke
