[Embedlets-dev] Re: Serialization...

[Andrzej J. T. <an...@ch...>]

Chris said:

> I think that everyone agrees that:
> 
> 1. The classic binary serialization is not going to work. (It is not
> supported on all platforms, version issues etc.)
> 2. XML should form the basis for defining Embedlet configuration
> 3. Life cycle and configuration are separate issues that require separate
> consideration.
> 4. Dynamic configuration is a good thing.
> 5. Static configuration  may be required on constrained platforms (James is
> the expert on this one).

I agree.  Only one minor clarification.  #4 is a Good Thing(tm) but it should be 
an optional service (not a mandatory part of the core).

> The issue is:
> 
> 1. Whether to do static or dynamic configuration first.

I think there are some other steps (as Chris notes) that make sense to do first, 
before we have to make this decision.

> My feeling at this point in order to move ahead is that we should :
> 
> 1. Lay down the Embedlet interface that defines the base requirements:
> identification, life cycle...
> 2. Code the SimpleEmbedlet base implementation.
> 3. Define the configuration XML schema for the SimpleEmbedlet.
> 4 Branch off the dynamic and static camps to work in parallel to achieve
> both objectives, while coordinating efforts where the specifications
> overlap.
> 5. Show up at JavaOne with running demo(s). (I skipped a couple of steps!)

Again, I definitely am on board with this. (fixed the numbering from Chris' post 
though.  Hey....you need a Counting Service Chris?  ;-)  ).

For #3....we don't need a formal schema or dtd right off the bat.  Best to design 
the config format by example (since it's liable to evolve fast during 
development) and then when it stabilizes, reverse engineer a more formal 
schema/dtd from it.

For #4, the classes and methods to do a lot of the config stuff can be made 
easily common between the two camps.  So providing we try to leverage the 
common code (no point in reinventing the wheel) that sounds like a good plan.  
I don't think step 4 will be dynamic versus static as much as two different 
platform implementations (eg. TStik vs uVM, where one happens to support 
dynamic and the other not).  So there may be other implementation differences 
besides just dynamic vs static.

When it comes to #5....Yeah Baby! (in my best Shagadelic voice of course). 
;-)




Andrzej Jan Taramina
Chaeron Corporation: Enterprise System Solutions
http://www.chaeron.com