Re: zogi - birthDate attribute of Contact

On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:17 +0100, [email protected]
wrote:
> [email protected] wrote on 09/06/2008 15:10:01:
> > If you mean "order" as in attribute A before attribute B then I
> > definitely think that is circumstantial and *not* a feature (like
> > selecting records from an RDBMS and getting them in the same order every
> > time - might happen, but you shouldn't count on it). 
> I suspected as much.  So I will end up writing my own binding mechanism, 
> or bundling Lua and using its binding. That's ok - it's pretty much what I 
> expected.

I haven't done much with Lua,  but awhile ago I saw a very good demo.  A
script was written in Lua and then very simply rolled into an executable
(compiled into a C program).  The program (about 450Kb) contained the
Lua runtime & dependencies.  It could then be shuttled off to an XP or
Windows 98 machine... and run.  Seems like a very interesting technique
as sometimes .NET / Java is much to dependency ridden and installing
something like Python is too invasive - and writing an simple tool in
C/C++ too time consuming.

http://www.keplerproject.org/luaxmlrpc/
http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaXml
http://www.place.org/~nop/lua/
http://heavycoder.com/tutorials/lua_embed.php
http://www.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/~lhf/ftp/lua/

> > You should be able to send any struct you receive from zOGI straight
> > back to zOGI unmodified.  That is a design principle,  if there is a
> > case where that doesn't work it is a bug. 
> Right.  And as far as you know, of the First Class Entity attributes it is 
> only when birthDate and completionDate have null values where this is not 
> true?

Yes.  All other dateTime values will always have a value.

> > What I'm thinking is to leave the empty string as the default behavior
> > since there are currently client code that deals with it. 
> I think you should just leave it as it is.  Once I look at the Lua xml-rpc 
> bindings, this may all turn out to be a non-issue.  Sorry if I wasted your 
> time, but it was informative for me anyway.

No, not a waste of time, it is a legitimate issue.  A large part of
making a friendly environment for developers is squashing all the little
stupidities/inconsistencies every-single-developer is otherwise burdened
with (a) knowing about and (b) working around.

-- 
OpenGroupware.org XML-RPC
[email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/xmlrpc