Sent by Rickard_Öberg on 21 November 2003 12:12
Serge Huber wrote:
> Well one of the arguments I could see for JSR 170 support on small
> systems would be to be able to move content from one Java CMS to
> another, achieving "portability" of CMS :)
Right, but that's not a very convincing reason for us right now. We'd
prefer if there was some direct payoff with current users of our CMS.
> Anyway, my thoughts on JSR 170 is that although it is a good thing, it
> is too limited. I think there should be some sort of language-agnostic
> binding, such as JSR-168 has WSRP, so that people can access CMS content
> even outside of Java applications. Granted you could always build your
> own wrappers, but it wouldn't be standard.
Right, but the current API is at least very practical for the Java-case.
Basing it on WebServices might be more generalized, but it's also more
overhead and not as convenient.
The XML serialization interface in 6.10 seems like a good way to deal
with it though. You'd mostly just need a language-specific wrapper (e.g.
PHP->Java or Python->Java) to use that.
> CMS systems often assume that you will use them, and that's it. But this
> does not reflect the reality of what's going on in small, medium and
> large enterprises. Systems have to interconnect, and CMS' especially
> should on the long term be able to help people use their data on
> different mediums. It's a pipe dream but why not ?
+1.
> So in effect my reflections on JSR-170 it's similar to JDBC. It's a
> common interface to talk to Java-based CMS', so it'll do some good, but
> it will not necessarily be the overwhelming standard (what happens if
> Microsoft starts defining a SOAP standard for example ?)
Right. I am more concerned with whether it will be popular or not in the
Java community. JSR168 seems to be immensely popular, but it has gotten
quite a lot of exposure lately. Heck, even some of our (relatively)
non-technical clients ask about it. Will JSR170 be as popular? That is
the question. It needs to get some momentum in order to become
significant I think.
That said, Level 1 seems to be so trivial that it's almost on the "why
not?" category. Might as well "just do it".
Anyway, thanks for your thoughts Serge.
/Rickard
--
http://cms-list.org/
please trim your posts.
