airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerai...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Airavata GSoC 2013 Master Project
Date Fri, 03 May 2013 17:29:49 GMT
@Viknes

You can easily add a topic which explain what you have proposed in you
proposal  in few words.

Thanks,
Shameera.


On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Raminder Singh <raminderjsingh@gmail.com>wrote:

> Yes this need to be done in melange system. Mentors can do that. I will
> take a look to tag Airavata proposals.
>
> Thanks
> Raminder
>
> On May 3, 2013, at 1:12 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura wrote:
>
> > Well I did not do anything specifically. Maybe a reviewer hooked it up?.
> > Not sure. All I did was to use the same name that was used in the
> > corresponding JIRA ticket.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Danushka
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Viknes Balasubramanee <viknesb@msn.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hey Guys,
> >>
> >> Can you please share in the list how to associate our proposal with a
> >> specific project.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Viknes
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Suresh Marru [mailto:smarru@apache.org]
> >> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 9:11 AM
> >> To: dev@airavata.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Airavata GSoC 2013 Master Project
> >>
> >> Hi Subho,
> >>
> >> I do not see your proposal associated with Airavata. May be Danushka or
> >> Shameera can tell you how they tagged it to airavata.
> >>
> >> Suresh
> >>
> >> On May 3, 2013, at 8:43 AM, Subho Banerjee <subs.zero@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>> You can find a rough draft of my proposal at
> >>> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2013/sub
> >>> hobanerjee/13001
> >>>
> >>> I am now working against the clock (6 hours left) to iron out the
> >>> edges and to put in any content I am missing.
> >>>
> >>> Any comments would be welcome.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Subho,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
> >>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Please find the proposal for "AMQP Messaging protocol support for
> >>>> Airavata WS-Messenger" at [1]
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Danushka
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] -
> >>>>
> >>>> https://google-melange.appspot.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc20
> >>>> 13/danushka/1#
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Ping!! No proposals yet beyond Shameera's and Danushka's place
> holder.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On May 1, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Vijayendra,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As you can see from Shameera's proposal, he proposed a JSON
> >>>>>> conversion
> >>>>> in front of WS Messenger. Also Danuska has been proposing for the
> >>>>> AMQP
> >>>> and
> >>>>> idea and deliberating its advantages. So given all these, I would
> >>>>> suggest for you to keep focused on the UI aspects of the monitoring
> >>>>> and write
> >>>> into
> >>>>> your proposal a plan for determining a good strategy for the
> >>>>> plumbing to WS-Eventing based existing system. You can have the
> >>>>> concrete deliverables of new UI to change colors based on executions
> >>>>> (as it currently does in XBaya), double click and show error
> >>>>> messages and so forth. And keep it exploratory for the actually
> >> messaging format.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I do not have any opinion on the libraries you mentioned, but
yaa a
> >>>> ajax
> >>>>> based pub system might be the right way to go. Pending the content
> >>>>> format (JSON or WS-Eventing or JMS or AMQP or something else)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On May 1, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Vijayendra Grampurohit <
> >>>>> vijayendra.sdm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Suresh
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am writing proposal for monitoring tool . The monitoring
tool is
> >>>>> based on
> >>>>>>> pub-sub model (ws-messenger).
> >>>>>>> While writing proposal , I have to back it by technical
stuff that
> >>>> tells
> >>>>>>> how can we achieve our purpose.
> >>>>>>> As this monitoring tool is supposed to be a web based ,
and we are
> >>>>> thinking
> >>>>>>> in the lines of
> >>>>>>> developing it in javascript.
> >>>>>>> I was looking into javascript libraries that can we used
with
> >>>>> ws-messenger
> >>>>>>> in the monitoring module.
> >>>>>>> Please correct me if I am wrong.
> >>>>>>> I came across some of the libraries
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - jQuery custom
> >>>>>>> events<
> >>>>> http://weblog.bocoup.com/publishsubscribe-with-jquery-custom-events>
> >>>>>>> - AmplifyJS Pub/Sub <http://amplifyjs.com/api/pubsub/>
> >>>>>>> - PubSubJS <https://github.com/mroderick/PubSubJS>
> >>>>>>> - js-signals <http://millermedeiros.github.com/js-signals/>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> please tell me am I thinking in right direction?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>> Vijayendra
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Shameera,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is great, I appreciate you sharing it, I realize
this is
> >>>>>>>> still working document, but I want other students to
start seeing
> >>>>>>>> it and
> >>>>> model
> >>>>>>>> their proposals in a similar way.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Airavata Mentors,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please provide feedback directly on the melange site
and uncheck
> >>>>>>>> the "private" box when you comment.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On May 1, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
> >>>>> shameerainfo@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Suresh and All,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Of course I am very much happy to share my proposal
with
> >>>>>>>>> everybody, actually i was going to update this thread
with the
> >>>>>>>>> melange link in
> >>>>> few
> >>>>>>>>> hours once i have done writing all the sections
in the proposal.
> >>>>>>>>> I
> >>>>>>>> haven't
> >>>>>>>>> yet added the milestone plan into it and now working
on it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The sub area i am going to work from the Master
project  is '
> >>>>>>>> Implementing
> >>>>>>>>> a JSON interface to Airavata Client side and Registry
component'.
> >>>>> Here is
> >>>>>>>>> the link
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2013/sh
> >>>> ameera/60002#
> >>>>>>>>> .
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please note that i haven't completed everything
in this and
> >>>>>>>>> still
> >>>>> doing
> >>>>>>>>> modifications .Therefore proposal content may be
changed bit,
> >>>>>>>>> need
> >>>> to
> >>>>> add
> >>>>>>>>> more technical details of the approach which explains
it well.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I would like to know the feedback from all of you
regarding the
> >>>>> proposal
> >>>>>>>>> and will be modifying it if there is anything to
be done. Also
> >>>> please
> >>>>>>>>> contact me if you need any help and i am very much
willing to
> >>>>>>>>> share
> >>>> my
> >>>>>>>>> thoughts with all.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>>>> Shameera
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Shameera,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Excellent proposal, great job. Would you mind
to make  your
> >>>> proposal
> >>>>>>>>>> public and post the link here? Your proposal
should help others
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>> look
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> it and learn from.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Again I emphasize to all students, please don't
feel you will
> >>>>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>> competing
> >>>>>>>>>> with each others. If all of you write good proposals,
there is
> >>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>> good
> >>>>>>>>>> chance all of you will be selected. But without
a good
> >>>>>>>>>> proposal, we
> >>>>>>>> cannot
> >>>>>>>>>> help.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2013, at 1:22 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka
<
> >>>>>>>> shameerainfo@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes it is not easy to solve all problems,
But defining our own
> >>>>> standard
> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>> adhere to any standard
> >>>>>>>>>>> provided by third party library will solve
the problem to some
> >>>>> extend.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Here i see two possible approaches,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1. Use existing third party library(we can
find which is best)
> >>>>> adhere
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>> standard and see how we change the backend
to be inline with
> >>>>>>>>>>> it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2. Use our own convention with help of XMLSchema
(The way i
> >>>>> suggest).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> As Suresh mentioned we can do a POC with
both approaches to
> >>>> compare
> >>>>>>>>>>> performance
> >>>>>>>>>>> and changes need to be done in server side.
Then select the
> >>>>>>>>>>> best
> >>>>> one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Another question was, can we works with
graph data in JSON
> >> format.
> >>>>>>>>>>> There are few JS graph framworks[1] which
provide that
> >>>>> functionality.
> >>>>>>>>>>> we can use one of them to show airavata
monitoring data as
> >>>>>>>>>>> graphs
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Shameera.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] jqPlot <http://www.jqplot.com/index.php>
, D3 <
> >>>> http://d3js.org/>
> >>>>> ,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Processing.js <http://processingjs.org>
, Sencha
> >>>>>>>>>>> Charts<http://www.sencha.com/products/extjs/>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Suresh
Marru
> >>>>>>>>>>> <smarru@apache.org>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vijeyandra,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata Messaging is based on a pub-sub
model and the events
> >>>>>>>> themselves
> >>>>>>>>>>>> are xml (WS-Eventing [1]).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The Messenger paper [2] should give
you more information.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All (Especially those at WS02):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Here is an old effort from a Morotuwa
undergrad project, you
> >>>>>>>>>>>> may
> >>>>> want
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> read through these papers and chat with
the authors to get
> >>>>>>>> experiences:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1890807
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>> http://mgc2010.lncc.br/slides-pdf/Mooshabaya_Final_Presentation.pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>> http://kkpradeeban.blogspot.com/2010/09/mooshabaya-story-behind.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://mooshabaya.wikidot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> http://chamibuddhika.wordpress.com/2009/10/06/mooshabaya-generates-ma
> >>>> shups-from-workflows/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] - http://www.w3.org/Submission/WS-Eventing/
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.extreme.indiana.edu/xgws/messenger/doc/HuangY-WSMessenger
> >>>>> .pdf
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2013, at 6:20 AM, Vijayendra
Grampurohit <
> >>>>>>>>>>>> vijayendra.sdm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Suresh
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to know more about the
monitoring tool .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently from where does the monitoring
tool gets data . Is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> workflow interpreter ? or Is it
from the WS Messenger ( that
> >>>> might
> >>>>>>>>>>>> continuously
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> send messages to monitoring tool
as to tell how much is the
> >>>>> progress
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and what are the variables getting
changed) ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Again the how is the data being
exchanged. I guess it must
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> be
> >>>> xml
> >>>>> ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It must be one way data exchange
. I mean the data is TO the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> monitoring module.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Then monitoring Tool  is sending
back this data to Xbaya for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying to the user ? Please
correct me if
> >>>> I
> >>>>> am
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrong
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have downloaded the source code
from the trunk . can you
> >>>> please
> >>>>>>>> point
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> me which part of code should I be
code at for this module.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Vijayendra
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:16 PM,
Vijayendra Grampurohit <
> >>>>>>>>>>>> vijayendra.sdm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What i am suggesting is, we send
the JSON message directly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> Airavata
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Backend(or Registry)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> When the message gets build after
the transport phase,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> convert
> >>>>> JSON
> >>>>>>>>>>>> message
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to SOAP(XML).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> From that point message will treated
as SOAP message.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If we look at the JSON <-->
XML conversion there are set of
> >>>> third
> >>>>>>>> party
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> libraries we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> can use for. But before selecting
a one we need to think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>>> problems
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> having
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with JSON <--> XML and how
these libraries handle those
> issues.
> >>>>>>>> Because
> >>>>>>>>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> need a robust
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> way to do this conversions.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Shameera what you are suggesting
is sending the JSON message
> >>>>> directly
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Registry.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> when the message gets built after
the transport phase ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> convert
> >>>>> it to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> SOAP .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If you are suggesting Registry will
have JSON data instead
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>> WSDL ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Then this might
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> complicate the things  for us .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The workflow interpreter needs wsdl(xml)
to interpret the
> >>>>> workflows
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for other details .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Which means we might again have
to do some changes with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> workflow
> >>>>>>>>>>>> interpretor .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yesterday from what I heard in discussion
is that , they do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>> want
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mess with workflow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> interpreter atleast for GSOC projects.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What I want to suggest is , why
carry the  JSON data till
> >>>>> Regisrty .
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Build a interface
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before (Apache server API) where
we  can do the necessary
> >>>>> conversion
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (JSON  to  SOAP).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In this way we can avoid messing
up with Airavata server as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>> whole.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Client ( using a we browser) is
interacting with JSON (web
> >>>>> service)
> >>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the Apache server
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is interacting with SOAP.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Secondly yesterday Suresh was speaking
about validating the
> >>>>>>>> connections
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of the workflow.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for example , the workflow is expecting
a file as input but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> user is giving a sting  or int .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Here what I suggest is , while creating
wsdl in the registry
> >>>> for a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> particular
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> workflow , we can add extra information
in the form of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> annotation as  the kind of input/
output the workflow is
> >>>>> accepting.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we will be able to check these
against users entry
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> during
> >>>>>>>>>> execution.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please correct me if I am wrong.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Vijayendra
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:13 PM,
Subho Banerjee <
> >>>>> subs.zero@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well exactly, as long as you can
define standard way of
> >>>>>>>> communication.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> That
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is, you can define in advance what
should be a string, array
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>> what
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be a integer etc. We have
no problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So, when you look at problems, with
JSON <-> XML or the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other
> >>>> way
> >>>>>>>>>> round,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they talk of the very general case
(where you no nothing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> data
> >>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are converting other than it is
valid XML/JSON). There are a
> >>>>> myriad
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> problems in that case, which you
pointed out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But when there is standard, there
is only one way of doing
> >>>> things,
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> several. I think that is the way
forward. So what I am
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> proposing
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>> maybe
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> we all discuss and define this standard
within the first
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> week of
> >>>>> GSoC
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> starting and then actually move
into coding. So as long as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> we
> >>>> work
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> presumption that this will be done,
we really dont have to
> >>>> worry a
> >>>>>>>> lot
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> about this.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subho.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:52 AM,
Shameera Rathnayaka <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:25
AM, Subho Banerjee <
> >>>>>>>> subs.zero@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some of these problems are
very specific to what the XML
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> representing,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it might not be an actual
problem in Airavata, maybe some
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one more experienced with
the codebase can point
> >>>> this
> >>>>>>>> out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> All issues pointed out in the
paper is not directly valid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>> our
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> conversion, I didn't list the
issues actually need to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> address
> >>>> in
> >>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>> case
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> because thought it is worth
to read that introduction part
> >>>> which
> >>>>>>>>>>>> explain
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the all the issues we have with
this conversion and give us
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>> solid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> background of that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Anonymous values, Arrays,
Implicit Typing, Character
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sets
> >>>> --
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dont see these as problems,
as long as you can agree that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>> parts of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airavata will treat the
JSON in a standard (probably we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> define
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this) way.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue with JSON array only
comes when we try to convert
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> XML
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> JSON not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other way. If we map with
JSON, inputparameters and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> outputparameters in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ServiceDescription.xsd will
map with JSON Arrays.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore
> >>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>>> need to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> solve this issue.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> JSON XML JSON
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {"inputs":["test"]} --> <inputs>test<inputs>
 -->
> >>>>>>>> {"inputs":["test"]}
> >>>>>>>>>>>> //
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>                      -->
{"inputs":"test"}     // incorrect
> >>>> one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Namespaces, Processing Instructions
-- Is this required?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are separate namespaces
used in Airavata? Only place I can
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> >>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used is probably in the
WSDL, but if we can agree on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another
> >>>> way
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of communicating registered
applications' I/O parameters
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> front
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (JSON based), then maybe
we can work around this (minor)
> >>>>> problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> custom processing instructions
to the Xbaya XML parse even
> >>>> used?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Attributes -- Again,
this can be fixed easily
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes,attributes convertion will
not be a big issues we can
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> solve
> >>>>> it.
> >>>>>>>> As
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lahiru mentioned in Hangout
session namesapce handling is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not a
> >>>>> big
> >>>>>>>>>>>> issue
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with Airavata.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <array name="abc">
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <element>1</element>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <element>2</element>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <element>3</element>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <element>4</element>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </array>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can become
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abc : ['1', '2', '3', '4']
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> With this example it show us
we need to change the XML
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> message
> >>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> server side, which require to
change the all schemas, If we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>> going
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> change the schemas then we need
to change the way it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> process it
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ariavara
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> core. We have dropped our initial
major requirement, which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>> keep
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata Server side as it is.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with this conversion we only
deal with json strings, yes we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
> >>>>> send
> >>>>>>>>>>>> JSON
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> request with other formats supported
by JSON like boolen,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> null,
> >>>>>>>> Number
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc.. But there is no way to
get the same JSON from XML as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> XML
> >>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>>>> deal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only with Strings. I think it
is good if we can consume a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>> features
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with JSON.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> let say i need to send a integer
or float to the server
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> using
> >>>>> JSON
> >>>>>>>>>> then
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper way is to send {"<name>":123.45}
this will works
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fine
> >>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>> problem is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> how we get the same output ?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shameera.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subho.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>>>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT
gmail.com Blog :
> >>>>>>>>> http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,
Shameera Rathnayaka.

email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message