Agreed LJ. Axton, the reason I was leaning toward some kind of form solution is that calls to Web Services are (relatively) expensive in performance terms, particularly when the mid-tier is on another system, which it usually is. Not that whatever is designed shouldn't include a Web Service access option, but do we really want every create, lookup, or modify operation between apps within ITSM itself to have that overhead? I would think it would be particularly expensive to access the cmdb info only via web services as that data is constantly being hit. Plus, this type of approach would allow third party ARS based apps to adopt the same model, using the same tools.
I was thinking more in terms of some kind of special form definition or perhaps it is a new object of type interface. That way you could publish it for use in something like a Service action model locally and as a web service remotely, but use the same definition to build both, thereby keeping it consistent while avoiding the performance hit of accessing the mid-tier. The Interface type could then connect to multiple back end forms via mappings (similar to joins/web service definitions) to address your complex transaction types, contain the rules and exceptions, etc...all in one place, so the interface is defined once (or maybe once per interface version) and from that single definition, the local (Interface object and associated access method) and remote (Web Service) interfaces are generated. You might even allow filter workflow to run on it when it is accessed. Granted this may be a bit more ambitious, but it would give fast performance locally between apps on the same server/group and consistent local and remote interfaces. Cheers! Subject: Re: Request for Comments From: LJ LongWing <lj.longw...@gmail.com> Reply-To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 14:23:04 -0600 Richard, I'm sorry...I got hung up on the term...I completely agree with you...when I was using API I wasn't specifically talking about C/Java/etc...I was discussing exactly what you were just describing....that to interface with application X, you do a 'call' to the Interface....be that a Service action or whatever...the point is that the interaction with the application be through that interface, for both integration purposes as well as communication inter-app, so change, SLA, etc and any other app you want to integrate all communicate through that interface....I think we are all saying the same thing :) _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
