Re: Whitepaper: CMS interoperability?

Olli Aro wrote:
> As Travis already pointed out I got my standards mixed up (JSR 168 <--> JSR
> 170). Sorry for the confusion. But I think the issue is still there. Both
> standards above have been around now for relatively long time and still
> lacking the take up. 

i cannot speak for jsr 168, but jsr 170 is not a final JSR standard yet. 
the slow JSR process has been critized by many, and is not unique to 170.

that said, there is quite some interest on the jackrabbit list. for 
commercial interest in jsr 170, press releases seem to be your best bet 
at this time (at places such as contentmanager.net)

> So, are they already too old fashioned and should all
> integration go more web services way? 

hardly. i doubt web services will give you the performance 
characteristics you are looking for.

> Or maybe the way to go is to have API
> such as JSR 170 for a tight integration and then some of the functions could
> be exposed for more loose integration as web services?

perhaps. proponents of the REST school of thought might consider WebDAV 
on top of JSR 170. WebDAV support was recently added to the reference 
implementation (jackrabbit)

-gregor