FW: [OSLC] Generating language bindings for the OSLC interfaces

I noted this from another group I monitor and it seems to have relevance
with the UK work talked about today on the telcon.  Perhaps you should
compare notes!

-Cory

 

________________________________

From: community-bounces@open-services.net
[mailto:community-bounces@open-services.net] On Behalf Of Geoffrey M
Clemm
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:58 AM
To: Steve K Speicher
Cc: community@open-services.net; community-bounces@open-services.net
Subject: Re: [OSLC] Generating language bindings for the OSLC interfaces

 


I agree with Andy that a highly desirable deliverable from this
workgroup should be a set of standard language bindings (so every client
doesn't have to roll their own). 

I agree with Steve that #1 is the way to go, for the reasons he states. 

One simple way to start would be to create a page on open-services.net
for "language bindings", and let community members post whether they are
interested in: 
- the languages they are interested in helping to define/implement a
standard binding 
- the languages they are interested in using 

I believe it is essential that the "OSLC binding" for a given language
is consistent across all the OSLC domains.   One approach could be to
have a single "binding for language X" effort, rather than a separate
effort for each OSLC domain. 

Cheers, 
Geoff 





From: 

Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS 

To: 

community@open-services.net 

Date: 

02/03/2010 08:29 AM 

Subject: 

Re: [OSLC] Generating language bindings for the OSLC interfaces 

Sent by: 

community-bounces@open-services.net

 

________________________________





Andy, 

For CM domain I see it playing out as #1 as most of the interfaces
define deeper semantics on REST style hat can't be exposed easily in
most commonly available tools that I'm aware of.   We see this now with
Eclipse Mylyn and their exposure of a consumer Java API.  I see
JavaScript bindings to be of interest as well.  I have not heard of any
C#/C++ requests as of yet, though PHP (as a service provider) I have.
Now speaking for Rational products that use the CM interfaces, we
utilize common code (both Java and JS) which has been manually
developed. 

Regards,
Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645


ajberner@us.ibm.com wrote on 02/03/2010 05:14:14 AM:

> To use the OSLC interfaces effectively, client programmers need an
easy way
> to get 3GL language bindings to program against the interface.  In
> practice, most ALM tools, which are the prime candidates to use the
> interfaces, would benefit from either a Java or C# binding.  I can
imagine
> two ways of getting these bindings:
> 
> a) For each interface, someone in the community, or a group of
members,
> produce the binding by hand and maintain it as the interface evolves
> 
> b) Clients use a set of commonly available tools to generate bindings
> 
> Can someone from each workgroup comment, please, on how this can be
> addressed for the interface under development?  Which language
bindings are
> of interest (testing my hypothesis that Java and C# will suffice for
most
> of the community)?
> 
> Andy Berner
> Lead Architect, ISV Technical Enablement and Strategy
> IBM Rational Business Development
> 972 561-6599
> ajberner@us.ibm.com
> 
> Ready for IBM Rational software partner program -
> http://www.ibm.com/isv/rational/readyfor.html
<http://www.ibm.com/isv/rational/readyfor.html> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community@open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/community_open-services.net
<http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/community_open-services.net>
_______________________________________________
Community mailing list
Community@open-services.net
http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/community_open-services.net
<http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/community_open-services.net>