On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, David Harris wrote:
> Let me second what Gregory said here and help perhaps help make things
> crystal clear -- the RWI scripts do tend to be fragile and inefficient. I've
> written a number of them myself and I always cringe at the programming
> techniques I have to take.
>
> The problem is that they are extremely dependent on the un-published
> specification of the HTML tables and layout and encoding of values in the
> RWI. There is no specification because the RWI is designed for human use and
> all the fields are easily human-understandable. For example, it is entirely
> reasonable for OpenSRS to change without warning the display of an "order
> approved" value from no/yes to approved/denied. Humans would easily
> understand the change and probably not even notice, but a script would
> choke.
>
Right, we tend to first add features to the RWI and some time after - once
it's obvious the particular feature is being used heavily by resellers and
is something that fits into a long-term strategy, - we look into adding it to
the client API, examples would be the transfer status check or the
downloadable domain listing. We are much more careful with extending the API
than with adding features to the RWI.
Tell us where you think the API should be extended and we'll definitely look
into it.
Vlad Jebelev,
OpenSRS developer
