7 May
2015
7 May
'15
6:10 p.m.
And I'm waking this thread back up again because we've made further changes
to the proposed specification. First our stakeholder commented that it's
important for users to be able to eventually add functions/methods to the
application (class) and we need to take into account that new backend
business logic might be added by a user, adding a REST call, a velocity
function and a javascript function.
This triggered a cascade of changes to the proposal because first the idea
of transactions ceased to be reasonable because changes to storage could be
made by a call to a user-defined API so the same object should be usable to
actually load and store the items.
Secondly this uniqueness of the "application" (essentially an XClass)
simplified getItem() causing Selectors to become redundant (for which I am
happy).
The new version is more aligned with how we retrieve XWikiDocuments but we
stop thinking of XObjects as things which are attached to documents but
rather as data items in a nosql storage system.
Note I'm going to be on holidays next week but when I return I will be
interested to hear what people have to say.
For reference, the document is here:
http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/ExtensibleAPIforaccessingst…
Thanks,
Caleb
On 04/09/2015 05:41 PM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau wrote:
2015-04-09 17:14 GMT+02:00 Caleb James DeLisle
<cjd(a)cjdns.fr>fr>:
--
Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and violence. #JeSuisCharlie
I'm not sure I agree that the syntax is
significantly different from XWQL
and it's important to me that developers who are used to
$xwiki.getDocument("Main.WebHome") will have a clear path to the new API,
and in the case of selectors they don't need to know the syntax for most
purposes.
I recognize the value of references for issues where escaping might be
needed, for example: $xwiki.getDocument("${userDefinedSpace}.WebHome")
is a possible escaping issue, however in order to roll out references in
the first development, I think we need to verify that there is enough
demand for this design pattern to warrant hardening it.
It could be a reference serializer that generates the appropriate selector.
Also do you have a proposal for running searches if we used references
instead of selectors?
No, selectors are good for that purpose.
Thanks,
Caleb
On 04/09/2015 04:08 PM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau wrote:
--
Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and violence.
#JeSuisCharlie
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Interesting topic. An unified way to get data
from the wiki whenever it
is
from client-side or server-side sounds good.
I am just a bit sceptical about the selectors. The syntax your propose is
simple and elegant, but it's again a new syntax to learn, and different
from XWQL.
I would prefer to use Document/Object/Class references, which avoid
escaping problems.
Something like:
require(['xstore', 'xmodel'], function (Store, Model) {
var tx = Store.createTransaction();
tx.getItem(Model.createObjectReference(Model.createClassReference('AnotherSpace',
'SomeClass'),
Model.createDocumentReference('', 'MySpace',
'MyDocument')),
function (err, obj) {
if (err) { throw err; }
console.log(obj.someProperty);
});
});
I agree this one might be too verbose, but that is the idea. WDYT?
2015-04-04 22:04 GMT+02:00 Caleb James DeLisle <cjd(a)cjdns.fr>fr>:
> Thanks for reviewing this...
>
> On 04/03/2015 07:03 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Caleb James DeLisle <cjd(a)cjdns.fr>
> wrote:
>>> Well I made a "few small changes" (which expanded into eventually
a
> total rewrite).
>>> Fundamentally I really wanted to have access to transactional storage,
> even if it
>>> is not truly transactional at the storage level, exposing a
transaction
> based API
>>> will make adding the transactions much more powerful in the long run.
>>
>> I'm not fond of cryptic names like beginTx (I know you prefer shorter
>> names). Moreover seeing "beginXXX" made me look for "endXXX".
Maybe a
>> better name is "createTransaction".
>
> On the one hand, I am a strong defender of namespacing, that is to say
any
> function
> should be named in such a way that finding it's documentation is trivial
> (even more
> important in js where weak typing means IDEs cannot resolve function
> locations).
> On the other hand, I feel that a name can never truly be documentation
so
> easily
> typed easily recognized names are superior to those which try to explain
> themselves
> to beginners who are not fond reading the manual...
>
> Your point about begin and create makes sense and according to google
both
> beginTransaction() and createTransaction()
are used.
>
> So though I still have a soft spot on my heart for (begin|create)Tx(),
I'm
> ok with
> createTransaction() and we can add API sugar later if it happens that
> people begin
> dieing from carpal tunnel syndrome or the like.
>
> Updated the proposal.
>
>>
>>>
>>> Furthermore I opted to remove promises because there is currently a
> small standards
>>> war over which promises will be used and my experience from the js
> world is that
>>> when the best choice is not blatantly clear, it means the clear choice
> has not been
>>> invented (quite) yet.
>>>
>>> Third, and likely most controversial, I wanted to have a single
concept
> of getting
>>> a document or object by identifier or by query so I a bit unilaterally
> invented this
>>> concept of a "selector", which is backward compatible with names
as
> defined in
>>> getDocument, respectful of the document.objects(Class.Name) method of
> selecting
>>> objects in XWQL and capable of expanding fluidly to xwql or any other
> query language
>>> which we might add later on. I chose the :: notation as a separator
but
> it's not set
>>> in stone so I'd be happy to hear well reasoned justification for
> changing it.
>>
>> How will you handle pagination in getItems()? How will you escape
>> special characters in the selector? Considering that I can create a
>> document named "Admin.objects(XWiki.XWikiUsers)".
>
> The intuitive answer is "escape all of the dots" as per our norm, IE:
> Admin\.objects(XWiki\.XWikiUsers)
>
> Updated the proposal.
>
>>
>> The sentence "Though this serialization scheme is prescribed, it
>> should not be taken as a sign that " is missing the end.
>
> Updated the proposal, I meant to say:
> Though this serialization scheme is prescribed, it should not be taken
to
> disparage the development of alternate (eg:
more compact or speedier)
> serialization schemes.
> Because we might consider a protobuf based serialization for performance
> reasons.
>
> Thanks,
> Caleb
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Marius
>>
>>>
>>> Lets start a conversation.
>>>
>>> Caleb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/17/2015 06:11 PM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
>>>> I have been meaning to review this API, I finally got a chance to do
so
>>>> and I have some suggestions for
changes to it. Of course I don't want
> to
>>>> take away from the spirit of the idea too much but I have a few
> suggestions
>>>> which reflect things which I often find myself wanting to do in my
> applications.
>>>>
>>>> I've updated the page adding things which came to mind as I reviewed
> the proposal.
>>>>
>>>> One major thing I would like to see is transactions, I know it makes
> the api
>>>> more cumbersome but it does not need to make it much more cumbersome,
> it gives
>>>> the programmer much more power if they want it and and it can
> potentially improve
>>>> performance in the javascript version as it can flush all of it's
> changes back at
>>>> once, rather than making many http requests.
>>>>
>>>> A second comment is on the semantics of the store and get requests, I
> would like
>>>> to see common semantics between the get/set of object fields in
> velocity/groovy
>>>> and in Javascript, using a JSON Map to specify groups of fields to
set
> is suboptimal
>>>> because I would like them to be checked as they are set.
>>>> Clearly velocity and groovy XObjects can have general purpose
> get()/set() methods
>>>> which throw errors if invalid values are passed and after some
> research, I determined
>>>> that in Javascript, the Object.preventExtensions() and
> Object.defineProperty()
>>>> can be used to prevent the user setting any non-existant variables
but
> can also
>>>> type-check the variables as they are set.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Overall I'm fairly excited with this proposal and it will be
> interesting to see
>>>> how it turns out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Caleb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/27/2015 10:48 AM, Fabio Mancinelli wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> some time ago we wrote about an idea of having an extensible API for
>>>>> accessing structured data.
>>>>>
>>>>> The final goal is to have a uniform API for accessing structured
data
>>>>> both on the client
(Javascript+REST) and on the server.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have written a little design document that I am submitting to the
>>>>> list for comments:
>>>>>
>
http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/ExtensibleAPIforaccessingst…
>>>>>
>>>>> This idea is also related to other ones, like providing a way for
>>>>> dynamically extending the REST API, and also to the integration with
>>>>> client side frameworks like AngularJS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Fabio
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> devs mailing list
>>>>> devs(a)xwiki.org
>>>>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and
> violence. #JeSuisCharlie
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devs mailing list
>>> devs(a)xwiki.org
>>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>> _______________________________________________
>> devs mailing list
>> devs(a)xwiki.org
>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>>
>
> --
> Satire is the escape hatch from the cycle of sorrow, hatred and
violence.
#JeSuisCharlie
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs