[kepler-dev] web service actor

[Shawn Bowers]

I think another issue is if this kind of approach would be considered
"circumventing" the Ptolemy type system.  Is it typical for an actor to
pass token objects that don't have a corresponding Ptolemy type? And if
so, what ramifications might this have on static type checking within
Ptolemy and for enabling reusable actors (i.e., removing tight-coupling
between actors)?

It must be that the Ptolemy folks have considered the issue of allowing
actors to pass arbitrary Java objects, otherwise, why even have a type
system?  I guess that missing from the discussion/implementation is
bringing it back to the underlying philosophy or design decision at work
within Ptolemy concerning tokens, token types, the type lattice, and 
Ptolemy's static type checking. (I might just be speaking about my own 
ignorance on the issue here :-)


Shawn

P.S., I wouldn't necessarily say we were having a "heated" debate; more 
like a misunderstanding about what the real issue is/was -- at least it 
wasn't clear to me until the end of the discussion.  


On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Chad Berkley wrote:

> I just used java types as return objects because it was convenient to do 
> so at the time.  it's not hard to change.  I'm not sure why you wouldn't 
> want to use a java object, since soap allows for you to do such a thing. 
>   If we intend to implement the token passing system that we have talked 
> about before, i think we are going to need the functionality of a java 
> object, not just an xsd type.  but we can talk about this. I just wanted 
> to get something to work with grass/garp.  what did your heated 
> discussion entail?
> 
> chad
> 
> Bertram Ludaescher wrote:
> > 
> > Chad:
> > 
> > I have some questions regarding the types of data going in and out of
> > a web service: In my understanding, web services describe the type of
> > their data mostly in XML Schema, and not as Java types.
> > 
> > Since web services can be implemented in different languages, Java,
> > C#, PHP, Perl, Python, ... what is the purpose of adding Java types in 
> > particular?
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better to use XML Schema types and/or Ptolemy types and 
> > make them part of the Kepler type system?
> > 
> > We just had a (heated!!) discussion here between Ilkay, Shawn, a local 
> > web service guru (Jesus) and myself...
> > 
> > Maybe we should have a phone conference on that tomorrow or so...
> > 
> > Bertram
> > 
> > 
> >>>>>>"CB" == Chad Berkley <berkley at nceas.ucsb.edu> writes:
> >>>>>
> > CB> 
> > CB> Hi Ilkay,
> > CB> I was just wondering how your progress is going on getting the web 
> > CB> service actor to return objects (besides strings).  I now have a bunch 
> > CB> of web services that make calls to GRASS that I would like to use in 
> > CB> kepler.  All of these services return the same object 
> > CB> (GrassReturnObject).  If you want or need some help getting that actor 
> > CB> to work, I'd be glad to help.
> > CB> 
> > CB> chad
> > CB> 
> > CB> _______________________________________________
> > CB> kepler-dev mailing list
> > CB> kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> > CB> http://www.ecoinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > kepler-dev mailing list
> > kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> > http://www.ecoinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev
> 
>