Woah.

erm.

/me drinks glass of water.

ok... (comments inline)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ktegels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: 17 January 2003 15:40
> To: dotnet
> Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> 
> 
> >>6+ years of VB-based development get a little dull!
> Bit rot. It'd be like drinking an American Lager everyday for me. :)

Hey, it pays the bills!
 
> >>basic database interigation to get to grips with c#.
> Well, if I might promote some of my own work then. We have a 
> great C# Data Access book out :)

If I need a book to get connected to a database then there is something
seriously wrong with the language :)
 
> >>Hang on, I thought WebServices were just COMponents living 
> >>independently
> on a server that could be requested like:
> 
>       Eh, not exactly. I'm going constrain this answer to 
> .NET Web Services (so my Unixish friends won't disChOwn 
> me...) I'm also framing this in the IIS5 server environment. 
> IIS6 (Windows.NOT Server) changes the rules a bit.

.NET on W2K is our platform, thankfully.
 
>       WebServices (.asmx files) are a really ASP.NET pages 
> with different plumbing. When a WebService class is compiled, 
> the class is cached and hangs around someplace in memory, but 
> not in COM+ services (typically.) The IIS Web Service 
> instance that's hosting the WebService pages does register as 
> a distinct COM+ service if you set it up as "highly 
> isolated." Otherwise, it runs in the COM+ process for IIS. By 
> default, the class doesn't expose itself for use by COM in 
> this context. Ergo, you CreateObject on it and don't call its 
> methods via COM or DCOM.

Hmm, so do I write .asmx files instead of building COM DLL's, or do I do
both and call  functions in my COM DLL's from the .asmx files?

>       You do call its methods by SOAP transports or HTTP. The 
> methods and properties are exposed for reference via 
> WSDL-formatted DISCO documents. In Visual Studio.NET, you 
> really don't care about this part a lot of the time. You 
> already know where the services live, so you just add a "web 
> reference" to your application and start using the Web 
> Service as if it's local object.

So within the code it is just another object, but it lives on another
server... and the server does the work?

> VS.NET automatically 
> generates what's best described as a "stub proxy." 
> 
>       The stub proxy is a little bit of magic that does all 
> the hard work. It digests the SOAP messages that are 
> exchanged between the client and the server so that to you, 
> they look like you directly using the methods of class that 
> running in the WebService on the server side. Frankly, that's 
> what's really neat about .NET. Since it writes that stub for 
> you, developing can't get much easier. It's also the problem. 
> The more you need/want to tweak the stub classes, the harder 
> it gets. So while they look like COMponents, and one uses 
> them like COMponents, they aren't. It's just superficial, 
> there's a lot of stuff going on under the covers.

I am a bit lost but I'll take your word for it. :)
 
>       Your call syntax is 90%+ correct. That call makes the 
> stub send a SOAP message (media is XML, medium is probably 
> HTTP) to the Web Service. The web service sends back a SOAP 
> message to the stub and stub digests it into primitive data 
> types for you to use. Yes, you can make a Web Service/Proxy 
> pair return XML document fragments that aren't so digested -- 
> the stub just extract the payload from the SOAP message. 
> Digestion, if you will, is driven by the types express on the methods.

So, the 'stub' extracts the data I want from the real 'message' that is
sent back, less all the padding, as XML?
 
> Is anybody else getting any good from this?
> kt

It's riviting stuff!!!!

 .b
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:41 AM
> To: dotnet
> Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> 
> 
> Hi Kent, comments inline...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: kent tegels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 17 January 2003 13:28
> > To: dotnet
> > Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > 
> > 
> > Chant the mantra with me:
> > 
> > Good language is worth a dime.
> > Good technology is worth a quarter.
> > Good design is worth a dollar.
> 
> Makes sense!
>  
> > (Conversion to local currency as suitable :) )
> > 
> > In a similar situation, I probably start out by figure out 
> how to use 
> > interop to wrap the existing COM+ objects up as Web Services...
> 
> We intend to re-write all our existing COM DLL's in c# (if we 
> can?) so that each one of us can work on them if needed, not 
> just the ones who know Delphi.
> 
> > Then would have moved on writing the
> > "pre-client" as an ASP.NET application that did any other
> > processing need and transformation of the data to HTML for 
> > the client.
> 
> Yeah, start off with something small and lightweight just to 
> test the stuff out with.
> 
> > Then redo the components. Then, understanding how
> > the system works, you can rewrite it as needed.
> > 
> > In this scenario, C#, VB or Delphi could be used. Ideally, 
> the choice 
> > of language is more about being comfortable with being "best."
> 
> Again, I hopefully with us all using c# we should be able to 
> maximise our time.  We're all keen to learn something new 
> anyway, 6+ years of VB-based development get a little dull!
> 
> > Using the wrong technology won't kill you, but
> > it can either make things easier or more difficult. Having a
> > bad architecture or a bad design can easily kill you with a 
> > project like this.
> > 
> > Having done project like this: let me offer this. It's best 
> to start 
> > with small bites when trying to eat an elephant. Do the 
> simple stuff 
> > worth to get familiar with using the tools.
> 
> Agreed.  I'm of course aiming to start with basic database 
> interigation to get to grips with c#.
> 
> > A lot of your excitiment (good and bad) is likely to come from 
> > learning the new stuff rather than from what you already know.
> > 
> > I'd definitely recommend Alex and Dave's "ASP.NET Distributed Data 
> > Applications" too!
> 
> Cheers; I'll make a note of that.
> 
> > You're correct, more or less, about having COM objects 
> serve up SOAP 
> > messages. But interfacing to COM directly can be messy if your not 
> > using an MS platform if you have a firewall between the 
> parts. That's 
> > why I'd go to web services instead. Web Services use SOAP 
> to do their 
> > work. Your other assumptions seem right on the money.
> 
> Hang on, I thought WebServices were just COMponents living 
> independently on a server that could be requested like:
> 
>  Dim strData
>  strData =
> getCustomerList("http://webservices.xxx.com/customers.somethin
> gorother")
> 
> ...and the data sent back is XML?
>  
> Have I got it wrong?
> 
> > XSLT is really the cadalyst in converting XML to HTML (or 
> just about 
> > anything else.) You can apply an XSLT to a SOAP to format 
> data if you 
> > like. Using .NET, you don't have to bother. It will break down the 
> > messages into more directly usable things -- much like yest breaks 
> > down sugar in brewing beer.
> > 
> > Helpful?
> > kt
> 
> Very! Hoping you don't mind more questions!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>  .ben
>  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:50 PM
> > To: dotnet
> > Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Kent.
> > 
> > The project is very real and very big.  There are three developers 
> > working on in, myself and two others.  The other two chaps 
> are from a 
> > strong Delphi background, and as I mentioned I am primarily 
> a VB/ASP 
> > man.  We've decided to start writing any new modules for our CRM 
> > product in C# with view to do a complete re-write.
> > 
> > It makes sense for us all to learn this together so we can 
> work more 
> > efficiently.  Currently all the COM libraries are written 
> in Delphi so 
> > there is a certain element of waiting for those bits to be 
> completed 
> > before progressing.
> > 
> > My understanding in that the data can be served up by COM objects 
> > (written in C#) to a variety of clients via SOAP.  Am I right in 
> > thinking that we can ship all the real processing and data 
> collection 
> > to the server, leaving us with very lightweight clients?
> > 
> > I'm not quite sure where XSLT fits in; is this something to do with 
> > automating the production of HTML pages using XML as the 
> datasource, 
> > something like that?
> > 
> > I appreciate any advice you can offer to a .net newbie and his 
> > collegues
> > :)
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> >  .ben
> > 
> > --
> > ben joyce // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // +44 (0)7958 933718 // 
> > http://www.babelfish.co.uk
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ktegels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 16 January 2003 18:47
> > > To: dotnet
> > > Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ben,
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the props about Wrox books!
> > > 
> > > C# is worth getting a book on if you'd not done classic C or
> > > C++ before. If
> > > you've done C or Perl, C# is pretty much cake.
> > > You really need two XML books in my mind. First is any
> > basic primer on
> > > XML. Second is Tennison's "Beginning XSLT."  No doubt that Dr. T
> > > knows her stuff and she's great writer.
> > > Web services is different horse. If you're going to write 
> > > them with an MS
> > > tool, I really like our beginning web services books. If your 
> > > going to use
> > > some other platform (say Java) be prepared for a lot of work 
> > > and reading. I
> > > agree that Web Services really aren't hard to write, there's 
> > > just a million
> > > ways to botch it up. :)
> > > 
> > > The best thing to do IMHO is to do. Find something you want
> > to write a
> > > web service for and go for it. MS makes it easy, fast, 
> and harder to
> > > customer. Other tools -- IMHO-- make it harder, slower but more 
> > > rewarding.
> > > 
> > > Kent Tegels
> > > Contributing Author, Wrox Press
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ben Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 11:54 AM
> > > To: dotnet
> > > Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Yeah, Wrox are usually pretty good.
> > > 
> > > As work is paying for it I'm thinking of getting this:
> > > http://www.wrox.com/books/1861007329.htm
> > > 
> > > I'm from a strong ASP/VB/COM/SQL background (5 years) and have 
> > > recently started using PHP, hopefully the jump to C#
> > shouldn't be too
> > > tricky. The Web
> > > Services stuff sounds funky, I'm dying to have a go.
> > > 
> > > Cheers!
> > > 
> > >  .ben
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Travis D. Falls [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: 16 January 2003 17:50
> > > > To: dotnet
> > > > Subject: RE: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Ben,
> > > > Before you buy a book check out the web for soap and xml
> > tutorials.
> > > > Soap is just a protocol/standard that you format you xml
> > in.  Once
> > > > you understand basic xml (it isn't that complicated it 
> is just a 
> > > > standard way to mark up plain text) you will can just 
> read up on 
> > > > soap on the web. They you can buy or find a book on C# 
> is should 
> > > > have a section on xml and touch on soap.  The wrox (big
> > red books)
> > > > should have a good section. I have done soap and xml 
> before, and 
> > > > accessed then via java and vb.net. I am sure C# is the same.
> > > > 
> > > > travis
> > > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: ben joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 12:20 PM
> > > > To: dotnet
> > > > Subject: c#, xml, SOAP, etc
> > > > 
> > > > hi all.
> > > > 
> > > > just wondering if anyone can recommend a good book for
> > learning how
> > > > to build & use SOAP objects in c#/xml.  My idea is that my 
> > > > app/website (plan to write both) will request data via 
> SOAP.  c# 
> > > > will talk to the database and return data in XML back to
> > the calling
> > 
> > > > code, where is is displayed.
> > > > 
> > > > I've never used c#, very little XML and not touched 
> SOAP so a good
> > > > book is needed!
> > > > 
> > > > suggestions appreciated!
> > > > 
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > 
> > > >  .ben
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as:
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a 
> blank email to 
> > > > %%email.unsub%%
> > > > 
> > > > ---------
> > > > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com List
> > > > Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription 
> > > > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > > > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
> > > > unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> > > > 
> > > > ---------
> > > > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com List
> > > > Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription 
> > > > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > > > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
> > > unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> > > 
> > > ---------
> > > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> > > List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search
> > Subscription
> > > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
> > > unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> > > 
> > > ---------
> > > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> > > List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search
> > Subscription
> > > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > %%email.unsub%%
> > 
> > ---------
> > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> > List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription 
> > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > 
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To 
> > unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> > 
> > ---------
> > Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> > List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription 
> > Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> > Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%
> 
> ---------
> Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> %%email.unsub%%
> 
> ---------
> Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
> List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search 
> Subscription Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
> Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/
> 
> 


---
You are currently subscribed to dotnet as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---------
Administrated by 15 Seconds : http://www.15Seconds.com
List Archives/Search : http://local.15Seconds.com/search
Subscription Information : http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm
Advertising Information: http://www.internet.com/mediakit/


Reply via email to