There are enough alternative clients that I think it's safe to say that it is language independent.
That said, most of the folks on the developers list are not OpenSRS employees, and may respond, or not, based on their own agenda. Most share. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Dale [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 12:22 PM To: OpenSRS dev-list Subject: opensrs (was Re: FW: DES IV) I understand where Chris Love is coming from. I think OpenSRS should, first and foremost, provide a well-documented protocol to their service. Then they should provide an implementation. However, the documentation for the protocol is extremely poor and scattered. The client _protocol_ docs concentrate on their _implementation_! Now, I work for a Java shop. That is why the perl API is no good for us. Why perl may not be acceptable for others is of their own reasoning. But, it doesn't really matter why. There would be no issue if the protocol were properly documented. Protocols should be language agnostic! They're for cooperation. Most of my questions have been met with silence, but I'm used to that since most of my work deals with unexplored terrirtory and having to find answers for myself. OpenSRS once emailed emailed 'us' asking how to make their client access better. I wrote back with something along the lines of separating their current docs into a Client API (the perl implementation) and a Client Protocol (with better details and examples). It's been months and haven't seen anything yet. I would even be willing to volunteer on this effort since I would like to fully comprehend the entire protocol. Instead I have to rely on my own notes. My biggest concern isn't the initial barrier to figuring things out, but rather when small changes on their side become mountains on my side. So, if it takes me 1 man week of work to write a java client, that's fine. But when each new feature takes an additional man week to solve, then that becomes a serious issue. Should that time ever occur, I believe we would seriously consider a new registrar. -- Robert Dale digital mission llc On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Christopher Hicks wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Chris Love wrote: > > PERL is simply not an acceptable language for us and many others to > > work with. > > Why? > > -- > </chris> > > "Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a good book. > Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx >
