nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

oScript Modules Vs WebService?

Hello Experts,

Need to tickle some Brains. We have a product which uses oScript and Weblingo tightly integrated with LL UI. One has to install our software module to LL

1) Is it not good idea to use WebService instead?. We can code in Java and still have integration with LL. Can we use LL UI if we use WebServices?

2) What is the solution to move legacy oScript modules to webServices.

thanks in advance

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

The opentext webservices in livelink is written to support external programming languages to do things in livelink.The webservices call on your client application just gets sent to the oscript engine of livelink.Livelink webservices are basically a replacement for old lapi type calls more in tune with modern day programming.

Similarly the UI is made up of HTML and weblingo that gets sent to the oscript engine.To draw a parallel think of weblingo as OpenText's way of jsp or asp.

With webservices you cannot control the OT UI for a simple e.g if I was asked to to add code to enable a facet,I would have to find the right weblingo template .That is because OT's programming framework does not make webservices the first port of call.It goes through its dispatch mechanisms.Similarly webservices/lapi has its own dispatch mechanisms.

At least that is what I think.Once you are in builder proper there is nothing preventing you to call a lapi method or webservice in oscript sometimes it is more easily understood and implementable.So if you want to decouple your newweblingo to call the new webservices ,I have no idea you may have to write your own dispatcher...you will be ready when OT is ready

Hi,

With WebServices you are able to use existing functionality of CS in a different way. It doesn’t provide a UI, so you need to build that in your own client software.

With an oScript module you are able to extend the functionality of Content Server, like adding additional actions or item types.

When you want to be able to use the standard HTML pages then I don’t know why you can’t just the oScript module.

oScript is certainly no legacy and there are no plans to replace it, so you investment is safe.

Hans

From: eLink Entry: Content Server Builder Forum [mailto:componentbuilder@elinkkc.opentext.com]
Sent: Freitag, 20. April 2012 22:19
To: eLink Recipient
Subject: oScript Modules Vs WebService?

oScript Modules Vs WebService?

Posted bystiwari@xybion.com (Tiwari, Sunil) On 04-20-2012 16:02

Hello Experts,

Need to tickle some Brains. We have a product which uses oScript and Weblingo tightly integrated with LL UI. One has to install our software module to LL

1) Is it not good idea to use WebService instead?. We can code in Java and still have integration with LL. Can we use LL UI if we use WebServices?

2) What is the solution to move legacy oScript modules to webServices.

thanks in advance

[To post a comment, use the normal reply function]
Forum:	Content Server Builder Forum
Content Server:	Knowledge Center

Thanks, I appreciate the info. This is what i understand

Bottleneck is tight integration of UI with Middle layer. This is same with all major ECM's like Documentum, SharePoint. However, they are using more popular language for the UI (Java, .net). Need is to decouple UI with backend. Web Service is the answer.

1) I am practically forced to use oScript if I have to use LL UI. (Love to get any idea to avoid this)

2) If I have my own UI I can use Web Service and there is no need for oScript learning (only possible if it's custom application)

Now the question is weblingo or JSP/ASP UI.

Pro’s

Can use LL UI
Development time is reduced

Con's

Need to maintain 2 set of programmers. oScript and JAVA/ASP
Since oScript is proprietary new developers are reluctant to learn.
New developer come with knowledge of Java/ASP no training is needed

Use Web2 UI framework and use opentext webservices.

Ferdinand Prantl

You won't be able to avoid OScript coding in any case, I believe.

If you decide to extend LL UI you'll code in OScript and WebLingo (and maybe Java) and you'll deploy your application on LL.

If you decide to run your UI outside LL (on some other web portal or as a local executablle) you think that you'd just cal WS and build your UI. However, you may find out that the today's WS are not sufficient for all UI scenarios - unless your application is simple. You may be lucky and find the OOTB WS sufficient but you should not assume it and check it according to your requirements. Otherwise you'd want to deploy you own WS on LL that would expose some LL functionality for your UI that is not accessible by the Core WS. However, at least, you wouldn't need WebLingo and much less OScript - just to send some missing information to your client.

I work on an alternative UI to LL running in SharePoint (AGA). At the beginning we used to "borrow" a LL developer from other teams to program missing calls now and then. Later some developers from our team learned how to add an API call to LL and stuff.

--- Ferda

Also this statement is not proper

Con's

Need to maintain 2 set of programmers. oScript and JAVA/ASP

all the programmers doing oscript are very well versed in other languages as well.Oscript is just another(pretty good concepts and functional) computer language so you are programming under the guidance frame work of OpenText who do not want every other java /.net programmer to extend it and(perhaps mess it up) as well.Without understanding livelink and worked in them for some good years it is not easy to write good code in livelink that is all.So if you need a quick win then oScript is not for you.You naturally look at .NET/JAVA programmers who can do quick wins for you with lapi and webservices or like Ferda who has taken a huge effort in making high level wrappers to livelink and has an entire code base to prove that it works very well.

In my organisation I am a .net/java and oscript developer I just go on changing my hats.....I also am an admin,architect,installer,end user trainer,auditor,performance evaluator,dba,sales and marketing head(that is a stretch of my imagination) what ever it takes to make livelink work.

Been about 13 years donning many hats in livelink and other languages so have to say this at least in defense of my favorite language

oScript Rocks Livelink Rocks.....

Thanks all for your responses. I am diving into the world of oScript. I know the LL community is active and dependable;-)