After spending a little time looking over the existing docs I'd have to agree 
with everyone here...

What I would like is...

a *real* XML schema for the messages, none of this perl hash/lists/dicts to 
xml mapping stuff that is currently in place.

I realize that Tucows has to maintain backward compatibility, but there are 
multiple ways to deal with with backward compatibility including middleware 
and/or adding a version tag in the XML and run the old XML version through 
one code path and the new version through a new code path.

Please tucows fix your XML API.

Pretty please. :-) 

On Tuesday 19 April 2005 10:17 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yeeeup. I've been more than pointed about this in the past
> as well and then the PERL mafia ( lol ) start flaming me
> off list .... Amazing ... So YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. ;)
>
> That said I was very pleased that Tucows implemented the
> HTTP Post interface, for which I was a beta tester. That
> certainly help in allowing me to author native Windows OS
> code (... here come the flames again ...) but I only got
> that working after having my hand held at a few points as
> the docs have errors / omissions and as you say the
> interface dialog just ain't easy.
>
> I've also interfaced to the enom API and is was trivial --
> And yet another point for which I was off list flamed,
> apparently thinking I was some kind of plant for enom ...
> I know Tucows is much more extensive and is much more
> robust for it's long history, but comparisons to API's
> such as enom's proves the point that the interface *CAN*
> be made *MUCH* easier than it is and it's difficulty just
> has to be a liability.
>
> I can't help but feel that a really simple to interface to
> API would be a benefit to Tucows. But I have want I'd
> wanted for a very long time so I've given up on making
> overall critisims and then getting the off list flames.
> lol I just have "personal" reseller accounts so I really
> don't care how difficult most of the stuff is since I
> don't need 98% of it.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:12:12 -0400
>
>   Brad Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Tucows....
> >What's the issue here with providing and open XML
> >standard that will work with (.net, java, perl, Cold
> >Fusion, asp, php, the list goes on...) any client
> >language?
> >I (and it appears others) just don't understand why you
> >are sticking with the outdated perl structures.
> >
> >As a minimum, write some middleware code between the rest
> >of the world and your backend systems.
> >
> >Brad Thompson
> >
> >Matt Andreko wrote:
> >>It was at http://ccs.tucows.com/blog
> >>
> >>I have been awaiting the preview release 2, which was due
> >>around "the
> >>end of December [2004]"...
> >>
> >>I wish they'd just come out with a good interface for
> >>asp.net or other
> >>languages.  The non-standard XML kinda sucks...  (maybe
> >>they're
> >>waiting for us to move to wildwestdomains.com with their
> >>asp.net
> >>api...)  The new ccs interface looked nice, but didn't
> >>work on windows
> >>2003 (at least with what testing I could do with the
> >>assistance of the
> >>Tucows support).
> >>
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>>Quoting Joey deVilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>>>Christian Roy wrote:
> >>>>>If the API that tucows provides (in perl) isn't in the
> >>>>>language
> >>>>>that you
> >>>>>need, I recommend googling for the API in your language.
> >>>>> I saw API
> >>>>>in PHP and ASP and I wouldn't be surprised if there's an
> >>>>>API in
> >>>>>other languages.
> >>>>
> >>>>FYI, you can find the PHP client at:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://sourceforge.net/projects/opensrs-php/
> >>>>
> >>>>Ir was created by Colin Viebrock, who now works in our
> >>>>Content
> >>>>division. It's pretty cleanly designed and you can see an
> >>>>example of
> >>>>how to use it at a personal site developed by Steve D'Sa,
> >>>>one of our
> >>>>sales engineers, at:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://apihelpdesk.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm going to also throw up some documentation for this
> >>>>client as
> >>>>well (I'm considerably more comfortable with PHP than
> >>>>Perl).
> >>>
> >>>Wasn't there another php client (PHP5) that was in
> >>>testing?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>
> >>>ed
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>domains-dev mailing list
> >>>[email protected]
> >>>http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-dev
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>domains-dev mailing list
> >>[email protected]
> >>http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-dev
> >
> >--
> >
> >     Brad Thompson
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >www.dashone.com
> >Office: 703.830.9647
> ><http://www.dashone.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> domains-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-dev

-- 
Edward Muller - Interlix
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
417-862-0573
PGP Key: http://interlix.com/Members/edwardam/pgpkeys

Attachment: pgpPSiELLlhwy.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
domains-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-dev

Reply via email to