axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff" <j...@cogentlogic.com>
Subject Re: Project from hell?
Date Fri, 14 May 2004 20:22:36 GMT
Keep 'em comin' :-)

That's so funny.


Jeff


P.S. I'm working on the SCS schema thing, Davanum.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Galbreath, Mark A" <GalbreathMA@state.gov>
To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 4:17 PM
Subject: RE: Project from hell?


> well....sheeeit!  I am trying to find the EASIEST solution - screw
> writing WSDLs and any other XML files!
> 
> I tried the Sun tutorial, but it would a fanatic 12 weeks to go through
> that one.
> 
> I tried the Axis tutorial and it made no REAL WORLD sense at all.
> 
> I tried the Oracle JDeveloper and JBuilder Webservices modules and they
> suck.
> 
> I DO NOT WANT TO WRITE XML - THIS IS RIDICULOUS!!!
> 
> 
> What's the solution?  I have pressure all over me to create Web services
> for every f*cking application in the ..... department.  What gives?  It
> seems to me that Web services has been way totally overhyped and it
> delivers nothing of value.
> 
> Mark
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff [mailto:jeff@cogentlogic.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 1:48 PM
> To: axis-user@ws.apache.org; dims@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Project from hell?
> 
> 
> #1:
> 
> You must be joking! There are more than 2000 DIFFERENT elements and
> complex
> types. The problems tend to lie within the generated code and are not
> obvious until you try to use that code...then you find that it doesn't
> work.
> I wasted way too much time trying make changes to the Axis-generated
> code
> before giving up. I concluded that Axis was an order of magnitude away
> from
> where I needed it to be in terms of complex payloads (though that
> perception
> might have been biased by the enormity of the SCS XML Schema). So I use
> Axis
> for connectivity (it's great at this, of course) and insert XML
> documents
> (that I generate) as document-literal content.
> 
> Well, okay, I'll check it out over the weekend and file a bug report :-)
> 
> 
> #2:
> 
> No. I understand that nowadays some folks use Castor in cases like this.
> Three years ago my customers needed something like a JAXB that supports
> the
> whole of XML Schema and connected to databases. There wasn't anything
> then
> so I wrote XchainJ. This product is now in version 2.3 and runs as a
> fully
> integrated Eclipse Plugin. This isn't a commercial plug though because,
> oddly enough, I find life is easier if I don't sell it! XchainJ is great
> for
> really complex XML but, unfortunately, it has been my experience that
> people
> who have a requirement for this are not the sort of people who have the
> technical expertise to use it! They tend to be scientists not Java
> programmers. I could ramble on at length about user perceptions, etc.
> but I
> won't. When I work face-to-face with customers they really appreciate
> the
> product and either use it themselves or pay me to use it. Typically, I
> can
> turn around a project that would take a week using Castor, JAXB, etc. in
> two
> or three hours with XchainJ (it does XML/Java/DBMS interoperability).
> The
> whole process of dealing with potential customers in other countries and
> over the Internet is more trouble than it's worth.
> 
> Interestingly, I presented XchainJ to the technical director of a
> company
> that sells Java software (on the basis that they could do the marketing,
> etc.). The guy thought the product was great but found he was unable to
> explain to his marketing folk what it did in terms that they could
> understand! If they are not experts, people seem to get fogged beyond a
> certain level of complexity.
> 
> It's a crazy situation: we have XML Schema that scientists are running
> with
> and producing very complex structures BUT they don't have the expertise
> to
> implement solutions. Then there's the computer industry that, while
> populated with developers who can work on complex projects and after
> great
> effort can produce solutions, has mainstream tool vendors that are
> completely out of touch with anything other than trivial XML! Some
> commercial products have been written by programmers who were under the
> impression that there will only ever be one XML Schema document that
> targets
> a given namespace. They generate error like "I've encountered this
> namespace
> before, what are you giving it to me again for!". Still other won't go
> beyond a maximum of just one XML Schema document referenced from WSDL.
> GML
> comprises 27 XML Schema documents that target the GML namespace (plus
> others
> for xlink, etc.) (and GML is a basis schema that users are _intended_ to
> incorporate as a component of other schemas).
> 
> An NGO approached me a year ago with a project that they had only a
> month to
> complete. It uses the CSDGM DTD (a.k.a. FGDC). They went to a big
> software
> development company before they approached me and were told (i)
> something
> that complex couldn't be done and (ii) if it could be done there's no
> way it
> could be done within a month. Using XchainJ 1.1, I completed the entire
> project in one day. Had I had XchainJ 2.3 then, it would have taken half
> a
> day.
> 
> In a similar vein, my customers currently need XML Schema support in
> rich-clients. The sort of support that doesn't exist today. They are
> going
> to get it in XchainJ 3.x. As I said earlier, there's a disconnect
> between
> the complexity supported by the computer software industry and the
> complexity required by scientists. While the Eclipse folks are working
> on
> SWT-designer support, I'm working on 'XML Schema / SWT rich-client with
> connections to controlled content web services plus authentication,
> authorization, XML document management, etc.' support in a generic tool.
> An
> order of magnitude disparity.
> 
> Now, if only I was a marketeer instead of  a programmer... :-)
> 
> 
> Warmest regards,
> 
> Jeff
> 
> Cogent Logic Corporation
> Toronto, Canada
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Davanum Srinivas" <davanum@gmail.com>
> To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Project from hell?
> 
> 
> > A few questions:
> >
> > #1: Can you please open a bug report with a pointer to the schema that
> fails?
> > #2: Did you try using any JAXB implementation against the schema?
> >
> > thanks,
> > dims
> >
> > On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:03:14 -0400, Jeff <jeff@cogentlogic.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > On a similar note, there's a disconnect between the capabilities of
> tools
> > > created by the software industry and the requirements of the
> scientific
> > > community.
> > >
> > > I have just completed a particular type of Open GIS Consortium (OGC)
> web
> > > service called a Sensor Collection Service. The XML Schema
> referenced
> from
> > > the WSDL file comprises 54 XML Schema documents spanning 15
> namespaces.
> Not
> > > only did the Axis bean code baulk at this but, when I had completed
> the
> > > project, clients found that the .NET tools couldn't handle anything
> like
> the
> > > complexity of the SCS XML Schema. Consequently, I supplied 'client
> > > software'.
> > >
> > > The originators of SOAP are conning the software world and no one
> seems
> to
> > > mind!
> > >
> > > If it's legitimate to distribute platform-independent data (XML) it
> must
> be
> > > legitimate to distribute the program logic that uses that data. If
> only
> we
> > > had a platform-independent way to deliver program logic!
> > >
> > > Forcing web service clients, as a matter of fiat, to write their own
> program
> > > logic is the antithesis of OOP: interfaces, inheritance,
> polymorphism
> all
> > > exits to promote reuse. Reuse is the Holy Grail of software
> development.
> > >
> > > It could be argued that each client has their own needs and so it's
> not
> > > possible to write generic client-side code. Such an argument is
> false.
> The
> > > fact that XML Schemas are used to formalise the data transmitted
> within
> SOAP
> > > envelopes means that each web service is necessarily
> application-specific
> > > and, as such, is tractable to low-level client code. Such code
> exposes
> data
> > > (in the form of XML, if appropriate) that can then be used in
> whatever
> way
> > > the ultimate consumer-code requires.
> > >
> > > I recently wrote a web service for the Government of Canada that
> provided
> > > document-literal content in the form of Web Ontology Language (OWL).
> > > Everyone was pleased with the outcome and loved the OWL
> implementation
> BUT
> > > the first thing they did was to nominate someone to write a generic
> client
> > > that dealt with the XML and provided the desired content through a
> Java
> > > component that everyone could use/reuse. Hey, that's an idea...I
> wonder
> if
> > > we could supply Java client-side code with our web services. That
> way,
> the
> > > .NET folks and all other non-Java folks could continue to do what
> they
> do
> > > and the sane software developers can get back to the preferred
> paradigm
> of
> > > using portable code.
> > >
> > > XML and Java go together. Sun and all other interested parties seem
> to
> be
> > > blind to the fact that making portable client-side code an
> integrated
> web
> > > service deliverable would make those services far more viable. Not
> everyone
> > > wants to get into WSDL, etc. when they could simply use a bean! SOAP
> and
> web
> > > services are infrastructure. Folks who use my web services want
> turnkey
> > > solutions. For them it's about access to scientific data. They want
> to
> > > operate at a higher level of abstraction than SOAP!
> > >
> > > Warmest regards,
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > > Cogent Logic Corporation
> > >
> > > Toronto, Canada
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Galbreath, Mark A" <GalbreathMA@state.gov>
> > > To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 11:22 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Project from hell?
> > >
> > > > EXACTOMUDO!  :-(
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Sherman, Dennis (END-CHI)
> [mailto:dennis.sherman@endinfosys.com]
> > > > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 9:12 AM
> > > >
> > > > Your task sounds to me suspiciously like someone at an executive
> level
> > > > having heard about web services, and thinking they've found the
> silver
> > > > bullet to all their problems.
> > >
> > >

Mime
View raw message