OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cmis message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [cmis] Proposal for "Mash-up/Browser" bindings


hi guys,

thanks a lot for the the thoughtful comments. i would definitely
be thrilled to have as many reviewers and contributors as possible.

i definitely appreciate the timing issues around this and i am happy to have
this as an optional deliverable of the specification and see how far we
get aligning things with the current schedule.

having said that, i would definitely like to state, that if we are actually even
thinking of introducing a server-sided proxy (as mentioned by derek) that
translates cmis into "another protocol" that can be consumed by a
browser to cover the most simplistic usecases we definitely missed
the mash-up usecase for cmis as a protocol by quite a bit.

regards,
david


On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Derek W Carr <dwcarr@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I had brought a similar issue up at the previous interoperability events
> where we demonstrated our widgets functioning in IBM Mashup Center.
>
> There are a number of issues in the browser today that are challenging to
> work-around in order to do proper XML parsing of atom response documents
> [specifically around namespaces].  In my experience, it has not been
> painful sending atom documents to the server from the browser, but the
> complexity in receiving it can be problematic given the current state of
> browsers.  If we introduce a multi-part POST it would allow us to remove a
> server-side proxy for our browser clients to support document upload/edit
> scenarios.  There are some issues that we as a TC would need to resolve if
> we introduce a multi-part POST endpoint to support document upload/edit
> specifically around introducing mechanisms to prevent CSRF attack vectors.
>
> Given the set of issues I would agree with Ethan that it would be nice to
> see this targeted as a follow-on separate release.  I would like to assist
> in any future definition of this binding.
>
> Thanks,
> ---------------------------------------
> Derek Carr
> (919) 254-8592 (t/l 444)
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>  From:       Randall_Craig@emc.com
>
>  To:         <ethang@exchange.microsoft.com>, <david@day.com>, <cmis@lists.oasis-open.org>
>
>  Date:       05/06/2009 12:58 PM
>
>  Subject:    RE: [cmis] Proposal for "Mash-up/Browser" bindings
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quick question: is this about adding additional representation support
> to the same set of resources (i.e. Atom, JSON, XML, etc.), or is this
> really about adding another binding?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ethan Gur-esh [mailto:ethang@exchange.microsoft.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 9:52 AM
> To: David Nuescheler; CMIS List
> Subject: RE: [cmis] Proposal for "Mash-up/Browser" bindings
>
> David,
>
> This is a really interesting conversation topic, and one that I suggest
> we add to the agenda for next week's TC conf call.
>
> Personally, I think it would be really interesting to think about a
> JavaScript/JSON binding of a subset of the CMIS protocol that would
> facilitate easier creation of "mashup" applications as you describe.
>
> That said, my $0.02 here:
>
> We intentionally structured the CMIS specification that way we did so
> that we could easily add new protocol bindings independent of the domain
> model, and at this point I have a strong personal desire to see the CMIS
> domain model and the two current bindings get "released" sooner rather
> than later.
>
> I believe that getting this 3rd binding right would take a non-trivial
> amount of time, and that if we're going to do it we should do it in the
> same thoughtful way we've designed these bindings.
>
> So I love the concept, and I'd love to see the TC spin up a separate
> deliverable for this mashup/web binding that we can target for a
> separate (later) release.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> - Ethan.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Nuescheler [mailto:david@day.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 2:17 AM
> To: CMIS List
> Subject: [cmis] Proposal for "Mash-up/Browser" bindings
>
> Dear TC members,
>
> as part of the upcoming Apache Chemistry [1] project I started producing
> a JavaScript library that would allow to access the atom bindings and
> would allow a mash-up client (browser) to interact with a CMIS compliant
> repository. As you can see on the CMIS matrix [2], the JavaScript client
> was able to connect to a variety of repositories.
>
> I noticed that the atom bindings do not lend themselves to be consumed
> by a lightweight browser client and for example cannot even satisfy the
> very simple usecase of uploading a file from the browser into a CMIS
> repository. Even simple read operations require hundreds of lines of
> JavaScript code.
>
> Based on my impressions I started to have conversations with a number of
> other TC members during the plugfest and over lunch I had a discussion
> with Al and others at my table around the topic of adding an additional
> binding that was based on JSON GETs for reading and multi-part POSTs for
> writing. The goal of this binding would be to deliver on the mash-up
> usecase and allow for very simple interaction with current web browsers.
> from a functional standpoint these bindings don't necessarily need to
> cover the full spectrum of cmis functionality, but instead should allow
> the most simple and convenient access to the repository just to break
> down the entry barrier for web developers.
>
> I think we could call it the "mashup-" or "web-" or "browser-binding".
>
> It seemed that everybody I talked to was very excited, so I would like
> to volunteer to write and orchestrate a proposal (Dave Caruana
> volunteered to help me ;) ). I understand that we would be operating
> under a great time pressure based on our schedule but i am confident
> that having such a binding would make CMIS a true web 2.0 specification
> and hence would add a lot of value.
>
> Please let me know what you think.
>
> regards,
> david
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/chemistry
> [2] http://liip.to/cmismatrix
>
> --
>
> web:  http://www.day.com/ http://dev.day.com
> twitter: @daysoftware
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
David Nuescheler
Chief Technology Officer
mailto: david.nuescheler@day.com

web:  http://www.day.com/ http://dev.day.com
twitter: @daysoftware


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]