That's a great overview of what SDO is, kind of like what I've seen in other places.
I'm still wondering though: 1. How does it make your life easier? 2. What would you do with it? 3. What have you run into that was a pain that SDO would make easier? I guess what I'm getting at is the problem that this would solve. There are tons of solutions out there looking for problems, and I'm not saying that this is one, but in order to really consider this it would be helpful to know what the problem is that it solves or what are your requirements that this fills? -David On Mar 11, 2010, at 9:49 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote: > David, > > SDO is intended to give applications an easy-to-use, uniform programming > model for accessing and updating data, regardless of the underlying source > or format of the data. > The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client applications to read and > update the data through a typed or untyped interface. > However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the core of each data service > is an XML data type. > The network is accessed again only when the client wants to apply the data > changes to the source. > Disconnected data access contributes to a scalable, efficient computing > environment because back-end system resources are never tied up for very > long. > I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with XQuery and XPath > > > > > > 2010/3/12 David E Jones <d...@me.com> > >> >> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the >> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be >> misunderstanding that though... >> >> Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it make >> your life easier? >> >> -David >> >> >> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote: >> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine, >>> which already has its >>> value and trust already established. >>> A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as >> the >>> SDO (Service Data Objects >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects) >>> to >>> services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI >> Tier. >>> >>> A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped. >>> >>> Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services, >> however, >>> in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Rodrigo >>> >>> >>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <malin.nico...@librenberry.net> >>> >>>> -1 >>>> >>>> BJ, Ruth, >>>> >>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a >> bit >>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity >>>> engine. >>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error >> at >>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of >> the >>>> entityengine. >>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now >>>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of >>>> connections, abstractions, and more. >>>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were >> big >>>> business needs. >>>> >>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap, >>>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add >> more >>>> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong >> as >>>> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, >> the >>>> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings >> ?). >>>> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see >> how >>>> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable. >>>> >>>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not >>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace >>>> entity-engine with hibernate. >>>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product. >>>> >>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a >> strong >>>> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA >> tools >>>> in its data model can only be a good thing. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit : >>>> >>>> +1 >>>>> Thank you BJ. >>>>> Ruth >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword >> "myofbiz" >>>>> ruth.hoff...@myofbiz.com >>>>> >>>>> BJ Freeman wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there >>>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all? >>>>>> >>>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't >>>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz. >>>>>> >>>>>> ======================= >>>>>> >>>>>> BJ Freeman >>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com >>>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation < >>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93> >>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/> >>>>>> >>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist >>>>>> >>>>>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man >>>>>> Linkedin >>>>>> < >>>>>> >> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> huang.mi...@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't >>>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There >> are >>>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ >> project >>>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", >> "Spring", >>>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide >>>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the >>>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity >> definition >>>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind >> of >>>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved >>>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what >>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the >> integration. >>>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM >>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar >> with >>>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it. >>>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that >>>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, >> while >>>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as >>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition, >>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive >> than >>>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Miles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi David: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are >> many >>>>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value >> proposition. >>>>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity >>>>>>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools. >>>>>>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to >>>>>>>> the Entity Engine. >>>>>>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to >> use >>>>>>>> existing tools). >>>>>>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing >>>>>>>> tools). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> More to come... >>>>>>>> Ruth >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword >>>>>>>> "myofbiz" >>>>>>>> ruth.hoff...@myofbiz.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz >> (basically >>>>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to >> see >>>>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like >> about it >>>>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") >> instead >>>>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!"). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and >> it's >>>>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually >> happen (or >>>>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), >> but >>>>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great >> thing. >>>>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and >> more casual >>>>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more >> involved >>>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I >> think would >>>>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to >> brainstorming >>>>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or >> UI >>>>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to >> discuss >>>>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" >> thread. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -David >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Nicolas MALIN >>>> Consultant >>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06 >>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/ >>>> ------- >>>> Société LibrenBerry >>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12 >>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/ >>>> >>>> >> >>
