You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-dev@ws.apache.org by Glen Daniels <gd...@allaire.com> on 2000/08/22 15:31:58 UTC
Proposed agenda for IRC chat
As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
Things like:
- Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
- Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
- Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
- Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
Questions:
1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
chat?
2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues for
the "core" server architecture?
Glen Daniels
Allaire Corp
Engineering Manager
http://www.allaire.com/
Building cool stuff for web developers
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by "Anders W. Tell" <an...@toolsmiths.se>.
Hi Glen,
Im working with a group of people which are hard work integrating OMG Corba
with SOAP 1.1 and/or XML-PC and we are interested in contributing to the
Apache XML codebase. We plan to release working documents within a couple of
weeks.
So I would like participate, if possible, in your discussions reagarding the
general server
architecture and contribute ideas and maybe also code.
I can see from the list you are creating that most if the features you want is
already specified
within OMG Corba framework so I/we hope to see a codebase with dynamic
structure/
extension mechanisms which allows for multiple solutions to be created. I would
be great,
at a later stage, if a POA (basically Corba name for dispatching requests) can
be used/plugged in
together with other dispatching mechanisms. The same goes for encoding
validation,
it would be great if the validators are pluggable so XML Schema, DTD, XDR and
OMG IDL
can be used.
Regards
/Anders
--
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/ Financial Toolsmiths AB /
/ Anders W. Tell /
/ WWW: <http://www.toolsmiths.se> /
/ XIOP: <http://xiop.sourceforge.net> /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Glen Daniels wrote:
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
> the "core" server architecture?
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by "Anders W. Tell" <an...@toolsmiths.se>.
Hi Glen,
Im working with a group of people which are hard work integrating OMG Corba
with SOAP 1.1 and/or XML-PC and we are interested in contributing to the
Apache XML codebase. We plan to release working documents within a couple of
weeks.
So I would like participate, if possible, in your discussions reagarding the
general server
architecture and contribute ideas and maybe also code.
I can see from the list you are creating that most if the features you want is
already specified
within OMG Corba framework so I/we hope to see a codebase with dynamic
structure/
extension mechanisms which allows for multiple solutions to be created. I would
be great,
at a later stage, if a POA (basically Corba name for dispatching requests) can
be used/plugged in
together with other dispatching mechanisms. The same goes for encoding
validation,
it would be great if the validators are pluggable so XML Schema, DTD, XDR and
OMG IDL
can be used.
Regards
/Anders
--
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
/ Financial Toolsmiths AB /
/ Anders W. Tell /
/ WWW: <http://www.toolsmiths.se> /
/ XIOP: <http://xiop.sourceforge.net> /
/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Glen Daniels wrote:
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
> the "core" server architecture?
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Jacek Kopecky <ja...@idoox.com>.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> I would like to add:
> - discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
> engagement)
> - discuss message routing enablement
>
> Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
> now.
I'm using ircii, it's the first package with the name IRC in it that I
found. 8-)
> Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
> ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
> expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
> for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
> daily (for whoever wants to participate).
That's a good idea. Let's make it so but still we should agree on a
meeting where as many of us would participate as possible.
Jacek Kopecky
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Jacek Kopecky <ja...@idoox.com>.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> I would like to add:
> - discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
> engagement)
> - discuss message routing enablement
>
> Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
> now.
I'm using ircii, it's the first package with the name IRC in it that I
found. 8-)
> Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
> ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
> expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
> for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
> daily (for whoever wants to participate).
That's a good idea. Let's make it so but still we should agree on a
meeting where as many of us would participate as possible.
Jacek Kopecky
RE: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by James Snell <js...@lemoorenet.com>.
This week is completely out for me... next week might be also... not sure
yet. If I have about days notice, then I could probably just write up some
of my ideas (for what they're worth) and send 'em out to the group in case I
have to bow out of the discussion completely this time around.
As for regular meetings, I think we need to stick to a few highly targeted
development discussions first before it is opened up to general Apache SOAP
discussion.
To paraphrase the current meeting topics:
1. Object Dispatch/Request Handlers - invocation and lifetime issues
2. Full SOAP v1.1 compliance
a. SOAP:Headers
- mustUnderstand
- actors (SOAP Intermediaries)
b. Multiref (id & href)
3. SOAP Extension Framework - extensible API for layering application
services into SOAP applications
4. Service Description Languages
a. Common Requirements
b. Usage Requirements
c. Preferences
d. Guidelines for selecting a description language
5. Modifications To Existing Codebase
a. Java-SOAP xsi:type requirement
b. General architecture of Java-SOAP package
6. C++ Project Coordination
a. Should the C++ look like the java, or should both be architected
around the results of topics 1, 2, and 3 above?
b. Who's doing what?
7. Apache SOAP Website Issues
a. Mailing List Archive?
b. Documentation?
c. Tutorial?
- James
-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 7:49 AM
To: soap-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
I would like to add:
- discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
engagement)
- discuss message routing enablement
Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
now.
Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
daily (for whoever wants to participate).
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Daniels" <gd...@allaire.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:31 AM
Subject: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
>
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work
(as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of
other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader"
for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate
design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to
make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues
for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
> Allaire Corp
> Engineering Manager
> http://www.allaire.com/
> Building cool stuff for web developers
>
RE: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by James Snell <js...@lemoorenet.com>.
This week is completely out for me... next week might be also... not sure
yet. If I have about days notice, then I could probably just write up some
of my ideas (for what they're worth) and send 'em out to the group in case I
have to bow out of the discussion completely this time around.
As for regular meetings, I think we need to stick to a few highly targeted
development discussions first before it is opened up to general Apache SOAP
discussion.
To paraphrase the current meeting topics:
1. Object Dispatch/Request Handlers - invocation and lifetime issues
2. Full SOAP v1.1 compliance
a. SOAP:Headers
- mustUnderstand
- actors (SOAP Intermediaries)
b. Multiref (id & href)
3. SOAP Extension Framework - extensible API for layering application
services into SOAP applications
4. Service Description Languages
a. Common Requirements
b. Usage Requirements
c. Preferences
d. Guidelines for selecting a description language
5. Modifications To Existing Codebase
a. Java-SOAP xsi:type requirement
b. General architecture of Java-SOAP package
6. C++ Project Coordination
a. Should the C++ look like the java, or should both be architected
around the results of topics 1, 2, and 3 above?
b. Who's doing what?
7. Apache SOAP Website Issues
a. Mailing List Archive?
b. Documentation?
c. Tutorial?
- James
-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 7:49 AM
To: soap-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
I would like to add:
- discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
engagement)
- discuss message routing enablement
Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
now.
Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
daily (for whoever wants to participate).
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Daniels" <gd...@allaire.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:31 AM
Subject: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
>
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work
(as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of
other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader"
for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate
design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to
make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues
for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
> Allaire Corp
> Engineering Manager
> http://www.allaire.com/
> Building cool stuff for web developers
>
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
I would like to add:
- discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
engagement)
- discuss message routing enablement
Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
now.
Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
daily (for whoever wants to participate).
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Daniels" <gd...@allaire.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:31 AM
Subject: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
>
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
> Allaire Corp
> Engineering Manager
> http://www.allaire.com/
> Building cool stuff for web developers
>
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
I would like to add:
- discuss removing the xsi:type requirement (related to IDL
engagement)
- discuss message routing enablement
Which IRC client do u guys use? I don't have a client with me right
now.
Unfortunately I can't do this Friday - nor Thu and probably not Wed.
ARGH. Today would work .. even though its a bit unrealistic to
expect many to participate. Maybe we can make this a regular meeting
for people who want to talk about Apache SOAP and hence have it
daily (for whoever wants to participate).
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Daniels" <gd...@allaire.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:31 AM
Subject: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
>
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
> Allaire Corp
> Engineering Manager
> http://www.allaire.com/
> Building cool stuff for web developers
>
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Jacek Kopecky <ja...@idoox.com>.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Glen Daniels wrote:
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
I don't understand why you call it general server architecture since
only the dispatching and object lifetime issues are specific for
servers while all the other stuff is used and important in both server
and client code.
Also the IDL-aware layer can probably be built completely on top of
the "core" which should be unaffected by this fact.
Regarding the first question I do think this is reasonable if we
distinguish between the "core" (message composition and decomposition,
headers, plugins and types) and the higher-level issues, like IDLs and
servers.
Regarding the second question, it's probably already obvious I don't
see the server issues as "core" for the messaging protocol that SOAP
is.
So my version of the agenda (and a rfc) would be
core:
- The basic understanding of a SOAP message API
- Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
- Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
- Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
higher but still as important:
- Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
adding message-routing (Sanjiva's addition)
- IDL-awareness (this is as important since it can make a SOAP-RPC
programmer's life much easier through client stubs and server
skeletons; also as Sanjiva noted it enables us to skip xsi:type
requirement)
As for when: Martin is here Tuesday to Thursday each week and I'm here
all the time. I've checked with Martin and we agreed it's not
absolutely necessary for him to be present.
Jacek Kopecky
Re: Proposed agenda for IRC chat
Posted by Jacek Kopecky <ja...@idoox.com>.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Glen Daniels wrote:
> As I see it right now, the area where there's the most overlapping work (as
> well as need for improvement) seems to be general server architecture.
> Things like:
>
> - Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
> - Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
> - Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
> - Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
>
> Coincidentally, this stuff is also the foundation upon which a lot of other
> work (security, transactions, etc) can be built in a much more independent
> fashion once the APIs have been solidified.
>
> So, what I'd like to do in our chat is discuss these issues. We can try
> tackling them one at a time, though I think most of them do sort of bleed
> into the others as well. I'd also like to perhaps decide on a "leader" for
> each feature area, who can be the coordinator for people working on that
> sort of thing. Their responsiblity would be to collect and circulate design
> proposals, generate some consensus as to how that feature works, and to make
> sure something gets implemented and checked in, whether by tweaking
> someone's pre-existing code or by writing something new.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) Do you think this is a reasonable tack to take for a first real-time
> chat?
> 2) Do you think the list above adequately characterizes the main issues for
> the "core" server architecture?
>
> Glen Daniels
I don't understand why you call it general server architecture since
only the dispatching and object lifetime issues are specific for
servers while all the other stuff is used and important in both server
and client code.
Also the IDL-aware layer can probably be built completely on top of
the "core" which should be unaffected by this fact.
Regarding the first question I do think this is reasonable if we
distinguish between the "core" (message composition and decomposition,
headers, plugins and types) and the higher-level issues, like IDLs and
servers.
Regarding the second question, it's probably already obvious I don't
see the server issues as "core" for the messaging protocol that SOAP
is.
So my version of the agenda (and a rfc) would be
core:
- The basic understanding of a SOAP message API
- Header processing, including handling MustUnderstand
- Extension framework for "plug-in" extensions
- Type mappings, and a framework for engaging some form of IDL
higher but still as important:
- Dispatching requests to objects, and handling object lifetime issues
adding message-routing (Sanjiva's addition)
- IDL-awareness (this is as important since it can make a SOAP-RPC
programmer's life much easier through client stubs and server
skeletons; also as Sanjiva noted it enables us to skip xsi:type
requirement)
As for when: Martin is here Tuesday to Thursday each week and I'm here
all the time. I've checked with Martin and we agreed it's not
absolutely necessary for him to be present.
Jacek Kopecky