The OScript Registry . . .

Kent__Jordan_(MorningstarUser1_(Delete)_1426732)

As a long-standing OT Affinity Partner, Morningstar has many clients for whom we have done customizations that involve unique subtypes, node names, etc. For example, we have probably burned on the order of 100 subtypes and countless request handlers across dozens of clients. We also have a number of products on the market (and installed at customer sites) with the same issue. Is it the expectation of Open Text that we will upgrade all of those customizations in order to make them compliant with the new OScript Registry scheme? Will OT Partners be privvy to the subtype ranges for all of OT's customers? Indeed, have all of OT's customers been notified of their ranges, or is customer compliance voluntary?Two years ago, when V8.0 was released, OT stated that it was reserving subtypes 1-2000 for it's use and that numbers 2001 and higher were available to customers and Partners. A voluntary registry was set up in the Development Discussion in the Knowledge Center. Were those registrations honored in the new registry?Also, originally Livelink Explorer would not support subtypes above 32K because of some hard-coding in the client-side component. Has this been fixed (retroactively, since some of our clients are still on V8.X) or will the 30,000 available subtypes be sufficient for all of Open Text's customers and Partners to have a share?In short, while I appreciate the effort that OT is undergoing to coordinate the Livelink community, I believe that the horse is out of the barn, and it is too late to try to get this thing organized now (BTW, I see the idea for an on-line registry was floated in this discussion over 2 years ago). Surely we are not the only partner in this position, and I expect that customers who have invested in Livelink development internally will be burdened as well.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

eLink User

Message from Johan Raedemaeker <<A HREF="mailto:jr@asbuilt.switch.be">jr@asbuilt.switch.be> via eLink

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">RE: The OScript Registry . . .

Indeed, about two/three years ago we asked OT to set up a system for the registration of subtypes.
We were at that moment one of the first companies to participate in the registration procedure of modules and subtypes.
It is a missed opportunity that OT did not organise an official registration procedure.
I propose we continue using the old system.
Maybe a new discussion forum might be necessary.
I also propose we continue using the same subtypes as being registred in the past. We have servers in production and even after upgrading these objects are still in the DB with these (old) subtypes.

Regards

Johan Raedemaeker
AsBuilt Livelink Consultant
tel +32 (0)2 254 10 64

AsBuilt - Information Management for Complex Infrastructures
http://www.asbuilt.be

https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=786303&objAction=viewLivelink

https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe

eLink User

Message from Hans Stoop <<A HREF="mailto:hstoop@opentext.com">hstoop@opentext.com> via eLink

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">eLink

Hi Trevor,

With the new and improve OScript Registry, it is our goal to get the horse back in the barn. Most of your questions should be answered in the next Newslink article (posted today in the Development Discussion) and also in the documentation that is available in the OScript Registry. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=2454603&objAction=browse&sort=name

There will be no need to change existing modules, but we urge you to register the subtypes that are currently in use. These subtypes don't need to be unique and when they are registered via import, you will simply know where the potential conflicts lie, if any. We want to emphasize that this will not cause any conflicts with your existing code.

For new OScript developments, the OScript Registry will issue the next available numbers. Going forward, if you use numbers that are issued for your new subtypes, you will be guaranteed that there will be no conflict with new subtype numbers or any of the other elements that have been registered in the registry.

We took into account the numbers that are already registered in the discussion. Therefore the OScript Registry starts from 30000, so it doesn't reuse numbers that are already reserved in the discussion.

The problem with the 32K limit still exists and is resolvable. In the meantime we will be closely monitor the rate at which these numbers are issued as we solve the problem. How long will it take to burn 2k numbers? How long this will take is uncertain but we do have time to solve it before this before it becomes a real problem.

Most of your questions are already answered in the documentation that is available in the OScript Registry. With the OScript Registry we want to gain control over the horse again.

There will be no need to change existing modules, but we urge you to register the subtypes that are currently in use. These subtypes don't need to be unique. When they are registered at least it is know where potential conflicts can arise.

For new developments you need to use the OScript Registry, so it can be prevented that collisions of subtype numbers and other elements can occur.

The problem with the 32K limit still exist and we are working on fixing it. In the meantime if your solution really depends on the Livelink explorer we can create subtypes number below the 30000 in the registry for you.

Hans Stoop

--------------
Register your subtypes in the OScript Registry:
https://knowledge.opentext.com/knowledge/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=2454603
Consultant Partner Programs Europe
hstoop@opentext.com
+31 23 5652333
http://www.opentext.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: knowledge@opentext.com [mailto:knowledge@opentext.com]On Behalf Of eLink Discussion: Development Discussion
Sent: dinsdag 24 april 2001 5:12
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: The OScript Registry . . .

The OScript Registry . . . Posted by Trevor_Smith (Smith, Trevor) on 04/23/2001 11:11 PM

As a long-standing OT Affinity Partner, Morningstar has many clients for whom we have done customizations that involve unique subtypes, node names, etc. For example, we have probably burned on the order of 100 subtypes and countless request handlers across dozens of clients. We also have a number of products on the market (and installed at customer sites) with the same issue. Is it the expectation of Open Text that we will upgrade all of those customizations in order to make them compliant with the new OScript Registry scheme? Will OT Partners be privvy to the subtype ranges for all of OT's customers? Indeed, have all of OT's customers been notified of their ranges, or is customer compliance voluntary?

Two years ago, when V8.0 was released, OT stated that it was reserving subtypes 1-2000 for it's use and that numbers 2001 and higher were available to customers and Partners. A voluntary registry was set up in the Development Discussion in the Knowledge Center. Were those registrations honored in the new registry?

Also, originally Livelink Explorer would not support subtypes above 32K because of some hard-coding in the client-side component. Has this been fixed (retroactively, since some of our clients are still on V8.X) or will the 30,000 available subtypes be sufficient for all of Open Text's customers and Partners to have a share?

In short, while I appreciate the effort that OT is undergoing to coordinate the Livelink community, I believe that the horse is out of the barn, and it is too late to try to get this thing organized now (BTW, I see the idea for an on-line registry was floated in this discussion over 2 years ago). Surely we are not the only partner in this position, and I expect that customers who have invested in Livelink development internally will be burdened as well.