I still think I would have liked the idea of seeing what the filter was 
creating in the backend as a SOAP envelop template. Obviously this does get 
stored in the DB as you can extract that envelope in the def. There must be 
minimal translations that go on before it gets into that def as if you edit 
that def as though you were editing a regular XML, and then import, the bad 
envelope gets fixed. So instead of ‘working from the outside’ it would have 
been nice if the dev studio had the ability to display that envelop and had a 
built in editor to be able to view and edit it if required..

Because that’s exactly what I ended up doing ‘from the outside’ using 
Notepad++...

Joe

From: Axton 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 1:14 AM
Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
Subject: Re: Future of the AR System and Web Services...

** I don't believe the current design is flawed, it is just limited and should 
be expanded.  Think of the types of things one should be capable of doing with 
web services in the following situations (which AR lends itself to): 
- publish simple services for outside applications to consume (e.g., return 
ticket details)
- consume simple services from outside applications (e.g., zip code lookup)

Now the current design can handle the above two scenarios for the most part, 
though the limitations Joe mentions are definitely... limiting.  Now consider 
the way web services are used in a SOA implementation:
- publish services to return complex constructs (e.g., incident, with 
relationships, with work log entries, etc.)
- publish services to return lists (all open incidents, based on some search 
criteria)
- publish services that accepts lists of data (e.g., create 20 incidents)
- publish services that accept complex data (e.g., create a CI with 
relationships, work info records, incident relationships, etc.)

In these scenarios, AR does not do so well.  Now consider these scenarios:
- drive the contents of a drop-down menu using data provided by an external web 
service
- perform a lookup from an external web service using 1 of N filtering 
criteria, and handle the results in a way that are usable (e.g., search for a 
person based on last name and 20 results are returned)

Whoever is driving the ship, I would encourage them to look hard at where SOA 
is going and how that fits into the AR and ITSM paradigms.  There are a lot of 
things that I wish could integrate easily with ITSM through web services and it 
would be even nicer if ITSM could plug into a SOA framework in a way that 
immediately exposes the full capabilities of AR to the greater ecosystem of 
applications that relate to ITIL functions.  The integration points have to 
consider the various user elements of how to consume and present information.  
If anything, I think that is where the current design is weak.  Consider all 
the places where a web service could be handy:
- search for data and present it as AR is accustomed to presenting lists of 
data (set fields list, table field)
- present data in the UI (menus, type-ahead, tooltips)
- and many more

My 2 cents.

Axton Grams

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Joe Martin D'Souza <jdso...@shyle.net> wrote:

  ** 
  Apart from arrays which is an age old limitation with the way the AR System 
can handle data, there were other limitations discussed in the integration 
guide (unsupported constructs), which sometimes cause problems with some web 
services. I do understand that the limitation of arrays can only be addressed 
after the system is made capable of handling them, but there are other 
limitations that in my opinion could be addressed with the system in its 
current state. It is possible to overcome some of these limitations by tweaking 
the filters after they have been created and saved, which means that it is 
possible to fix these limitations. I could give you a specific example of a 
case I faced off the list if you are interested. I wasn’t dealing with arrays, 
but a single row transaction. The filter generated a incorrect SOAP envelop, 
which according to BMC Support was because of unsupported constructs used in 
the WSDL (which is documented on the integration guide). However it was 
possible to edit the definitions to modify that envelop and correct an 
incorrect namespace and resolve the problem.

  Personally I feel that the design on how the web service filters are created 
may need to be reviewed. A developer cannot see the SOAP envelop that the 
filter creates – he is exposed only the mappings. I think if a developer had 
the ability to ‘view’ the envelope (just like you can view the wsdl if when 
created in the developer), and tweak it if necessary, that would be one hell of 
an enhancement, rather than letting the app do what it does, even if that means 
it creates a bad envelop which results in a malformed request.. It would be 
nice to have the ability to ‘switch modes’ between advanced and basic when 
developing such workflow..

  If this ability was available, I would not need to resort to a partially 
supported method of editing a def file and re-importing it into the system to 
make things work..

  I’m just thinking aloud based on this one experience which I’m guessing will 
be quite a common experience when working with consuming external web services, 
given that the version of WSDL that the AR System can work with is about 5 
years behind while most other systems that we generally interface with, work 
with the newer standards which I think is 2.0.

  Joe

  From: Easter, David 
  Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 10:39 PM
  Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general
  To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 
  Subject: Re: Future of the AR System and Web Services...

  ** 
  For obvious reasons, futures can’t be openly discussed on a public forum, but 
I can say that web services will continue to be improved in future releases.  
The inability to interpret arrays is a known limitation that certainly is 
something that is desired to be addressed.   There are, of course, other 
enhancements that we’ll be considering in the future as well.



  Web services is an important method for integrating applications because it 
insulates the calling application from version or structure changes in the 
target application.  Because of this, it is a focus of the BSM solution and 
will therefore continue to receive attention and generate improvements.



  -David J. Easter

  Manager of Product Management, AR System

  BSM & Atrium Solutions Management

  BMC Software, Inc.



  The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in 
this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.  My 
voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a 
spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc.



  From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza
  Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 2:50 PM
  To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
  Subject: Future of the AR System and Web Services...



  ** 



  Does anyone know where this is headed to??



  The current AR Systems capability or incapability rather to consume complex 
constructs limits a lot of what you can hope to do using web services. From 
hearsay, even version 8 does not have the ability to understand WSDL’s with 
complex constructs. Are there any definitive plans on when these would be 
reengineered to overcome these limitations?



  From my recent experience with attempting to consume complex WSDL’s, this 
incapability appears to be more superficial, than internal to the AR Server. It 
may be either at the Dev Studio level, or the actual WS plugin. It is actually 
in some circumstances possible to bend these limitations which shows that some 
of these limitations are not at the AR Server level itself. So that makes me 
wonder if it could be incorporated with just be a patch enhancement instead of 
planning it with a major release..



  Also, does anyone know at what level is a WSDL interpreted when creating a 
Set Field filter action that uses a WSDL? Is it interpreted at the client level 
(dev studio) or server level (the WS plugin itself)???



  What I mean to ask is when you enter the WSDL URI into the Set Fields action 
on a filter while creating a WSDL powered set fields filter, at what level does 
all the ‘magic’ happen? At the client side? Or on the server side?? I am trying 
to find if this is documented anywhere so if you have come across it please let 
me know where to look..



  Cheers



  Joe

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Reply via email to