Re: store example as a servlet?
Matthew Peters wrote: Thanks for the encouragement, all. I'll let you know how I get on. This probably off topic for this list, but the choice between implementation.web and implementation.servlet is an interesting one. The page Jean-Sebastien refers to says that implementation.web is the current thinking, but implementation.servlet has its virtues too. It rather depends on whether you want the detail of the individual servlets exposed for configuration - would you want per servlet aspects like the servlet init parameters exposed as SCA properties for example? If you did, you might like something like implementation.servlet name=warfilename#servletname property name=currencyEURO/property /implementation.servlet In this case you could present currency to the servlet as a servlet init parameter. This properly a topic for the place in OSOA where the SCA-JEE integration is discussed, of course, and I raised it as an issue there recently, though it has not been discussed yet. Matthew Peters Makes a lot of sense to me. Both implementation.web and implementation.servlet are interesting: - implementation.web models the contracts around a webapp and helps assemble a webapp with others in a bigger SCA assembly. - implementation.servlet can model the assembly of the webapp itself. -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: store example as a servlet?
+1 for using implementation.web. Simon Luciano Resende wrote: +1, implementation.web would be good. On Jan 15, 2008 6:34 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew Peters wrote: I have just been through the get started in 10 minutes and I like the store example; it's small and neat. I was thinking of adapting it and redoing it as a servlet, just to compare. I realise this is a backward step in a way of course - instead of the AJAX style, back to page refreshes, and running the code on the server. Nonetheless it would be interesting to compare. Before I start, has anyone done it already? Matthew Peters That makes sense to me. You could define a new implementation.servlet implementation type or try to implement the implementation.web described at http://www.osoa.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=3980. -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: store example as a servlet?
Thanks for the encouragement, all. I'll let you know how I get on. This probably off topic for this list, but the choice between implementation.web and implementation.servlet is an interesting one. The page Jean-Sebastien refers to says that implementation.web is the current thinking, but implementation.servlet has its virtues too. It rather depends on whether you want the detail of the individual servlets exposed for configuration - would you want per servlet aspects like the servlet init parameters exposed as SCA properties for example? If you did, you might like something like implementation.servlet name=warfilename#servletname property name=currencyEURO/property /implementation.servlet In this case you could present currency to the servlet as a servlet init parameter. This properly a topic for the place in OSOA where the SCA-JEE integration is discussed, of course, and I raised it as an issue there recently, though it has not been discussed yet. Matthew Peters Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16/01/2008 09:44 Please respond to tuscany-user@ws.apache.org To tuscany-user@ws.apache.org cc Subject Re: store example as a servlet? +1 for using implementation.web. Simon Luciano Resende wrote: +1, implementation.web would be good. On Jan 15, 2008 6:34 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew Peters wrote: I have just been through the get started in 10 minutes and I like the store example; it's small and neat. I was thinking of adapting it and redoing it as a servlet, just to compare. I realise this is a backward step in a way of course - instead of the AJAX style, back to page refreshes, and running the code on the server. Nonetheless it would be interesting to compare. Before I start, has anyone done it already? Matthew Peters That makes sense to me. You could define a new implementation.servlet implementation type or try to implement the implementation.web described at http://www.osoa.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=3980. -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
Re: store example as a servlet?
+1, implementation.web would be good. On Jan 15, 2008 6:34 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthew Peters wrote: I have just been through the get started in 10 minutes and I like the store example; it's small and neat. I was thinking of adapting it and redoing it as a servlet, just to compare. I realise this is a backward step in a way of course - instead of the AJAX style, back to page refreshes, and running the code on the server. Nonetheless it would be interesting to compare. Before I start, has anyone done it already? Matthew Peters That makes sense to me. You could define a new implementation.servlet implementation type or try to implement the implementation.web described at http://www.osoa.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=3980. -- Jean-Sebastien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
