From: Chris K. <ck...@ya...> - 2005-01-27 21:36:23
|
Patrice Freydiere wrote: > Are there any feedbacks, or analyis about the G1 protocol, the pros and cons > for evolving to a new protocol version ? ( are there only a security issue > and non XML compliant reason ?) > > -- > G2 document clearly point out an underlying Object Based vision, that (i > guess, as OO vision permit) point out the evolution of the base objects > (Albums, Pictures .. ), that SOAP can support, by defining namespaces and > types. ( but's a lots of work to do so ). > are the albums objects will be declined in a couple of child objects having > different properties, behaviour ? > -- > > Strong typing is often easier to implement, specified the parameters and the > usage. > What do you think of having a very simple protocol Fixed with a version number > ( fixing the commands and parameters for every call ) , easy to implement, > permitting several others software to interop, using remote gallery protocol > to exchange picture, backup pictures, retreive pictures ... > > a command , could get the implemented versions, and then can communicate in > the proper protocol version. > > this point of view will not reduce the functionnality as it is possible to > have several protocol layers without a lot of effort (if the underlying > functions already does the job , getItem , searchitems , putitem ... ) it's > only a communication layer. This is currently in the works, I'm working with a small team on an XMLRPC module for G2 to expose most of the API to any number of clients. Once things get rolling, There were be more information available on this list an on the website. -Chris |