[Dojo-interest] Marshalling support
ttrenka at gmail.com
Fri May 13 16:19:03 PDT 2005
Actually, I think we were probably thinking more along the lines of
what Scott mentioned, i.e. providing (possibly) client-side
serialization/deserialization of standardized formats such as JSON and
SOAP. But the goal is to try to be as platform agnostic as possible,
Although I will be the first to admit that there's been a lot of
argument over this...as well as the actual transport itself...
On 5/13/05, Tim Mansfield <manzoid at gmail.com> wrote:
> To be really usable, eventually Dojo will definitely need to offer
> platform-specific examples / starter code like the "API Kits" offered
> by Flickr for PHP, Java, Perl, Python, .NET etc:
> On 5/13/05, Scott J. Miles <sjmiles at turbophp.com> wrote:
> > I quickly encountered the same issue as Patrick (forgive me if I'm not
> > paraphrasing you correctly): bind() provides transport, but I need some data
> > protocol (and possibly marshalling).
> > It looks to me like, virtuously, the Dojo core is designed to be back-end
> > agnostic.
> > There are various toolkits out there for RPC/data-remoting. Note that they
> > are (by necessity?) tied to a specific back-end platform (Java, PHP, and so
> > on.) Variety of back-end platforms is precisely why I believe Dojo's
> > agnosticism to be A Good Thing.
> > The problem I've found is that the protocol toolkits all seem to include
> > their own transport mechanism too. In other words, I think the problem is
> > that these toolkits are over-specified (and not the other way around).
> > Probably what is needed are a set of protocols for various marshalling
> > schemes and back-ends. Eventually I will roll a system for PHP, which I will
> > make available. Hopefully other users can build (or adapt existing code) for
> > other platforms.
> > As I see it there are really three layers:
> > (1) transport (e.g. XMLHTTP). Mechanism provided by Dojo; implementation
> > details hidden.
> > (2) un/serialization (protocol): converting data to/from text
> > representation.
> > (3) RPC (marshalling): accessing procedures/objects on the server.
> > serialization and RPC (there are some standards, JSON, JSON-RPC, XMLRPC, and
> > so on) to which we could build compatible backend systems.
> > I'm sorry my thoughts here are not more organized. Figured I should just get
> > it out while the synapses where firing.
> > Regards,
> > Scott
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dojo-interest-bounces at dojotoolkit.org
> > [mailto:dojo-interest-bounces at dojotoolkit.org] On Behalf Of Patrick
> > Lightbody
> > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 12:57 PM
> > To: dojo-interest at dojotoolkit.org
> > Subject: [Dojo-interest] Marshalling support
> > I really like Dojo's io.bind mechanism. It's great! However, I also
> > really like DWR (http://www.getahead.ltd.uk/dwr/). In an ideal world,
> > there would be a way for the two to work together. Or, more
> > generically, for Dojo to work with existing marshalling frameworks.
> > Any plans around this? As it is now, I get more benefit from using DWR
> > without Dojo than Dojo without DWR. That is because with Dojo I have
> > to still marshall a bunch of XML on the client and server side and it
> > gets quiet messy.
> > What do you think? Can the two work together?
> > Patrick
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.9 - Release Date: 5/12/2005
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dojo-interest mailing list
> > Dojo-interest at dojotoolkit.org
> > http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
> Dojo-interest mailing list
> Dojo-interest at dojotoolkit.org
More information about the Dojo-interest