Search Results

Search found 21364 results on 855 pages for 'service bus'.

Page 173/855 | < Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >

  • Fault tolerance with a pair of tightly coupled services

    - by cogitor
    I have two tightly coupled services that can run on completely different nodes (e.g. ServiceA and ServiceB). If I start up another replicated copy of both these services for backup purposes (ServiceA-2 and ServiceB-2), what would be the best way of setting up a fault tolerant distributed system such that on a fault in any of the tightly coupled services ServiceA or ServiceB the whole communication should go through backup ServiceA-2 and ServiceB-2? Overall, all the communication should go either through both services or their backup replicas. |---- Service A | | Service B | | (backup branch - used only on fault in Service A or B) ---- Service A-2 | Service B-2 Note that in case that Service A goes down, data from Service B would be incorrect (and vice versa). Load balancing between the primary and backup branch is also not feasible.

    Read the article

  • SOA & BPM Specialized Partners Only! New Service to Promote Your SOA & BPM Events at oracle.com/events

    - by JuergenKress
    The Partner Event Publisher has just been made available to all SOA & BPM specialized partners in EMEA. Partners now have the opportunity to publish their events to the Oracle.com/events site and spread the word on their upcoming live in-person and/or live webcast events. See the demo below and click here to read more information. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit  www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Technorati Tags: Specialization,marketing services,oracle events,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,BPM Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • any online service and/or application to develop a story line for an adventure game?

    - by Gajet
    I with a bunch of friend were talking about an adventure game. there will be too many possibilities in the game and the player can pick from wide varity of choices at each stage to do somthing. there will be consequences for each decision and they may or may not end the story. the result would be somthing like (picture from flashforward series S01E17)or if any of you watched hereos season 1 there is also similar time lines represented as strings in isaac mandez workshop. sorry for bad quality examples but right now I can't think of any better one. do you know any website or application which we can use to create the timeline? these features the least required ones: the ability to represent events as boxes. the ability to connect distant events to each other. the ability to move events on a scene freely the ability to expand the scene easily there should be some color options for the lines representing connections between events easily shareing the idea with one another it's much more better to have a WYSIWYG editor easily explore in the large scene of events in the end if you know any application which could let me create a board just like the one in my sample picture and share it whith other freinds it could help us a lot.

    Read the article

  • How to name multiple versioned ServiceContracts in the same WCF service?

    - by Tor Hovland
    When you have to introduce a breaking change in a ServiceContract, a best practice is to keep the old one and create a new one, and use some version identifier in the namespace. If I understand this correctly, I should be able to do the following: [ServiceContract(Namespace = "http://foo.com/2010/01/14")] public interface IVersionedService { [OperationContract] string WriteGreeting(Person person); } [ServiceContract(Name = "IVersionedService", Namespace = "http://foo.com/2010/02/21")] public interface IVersionedService2 { [OperationContract(Name = "WriteGreeting")] Greeting WriteGreeting2(Person2 person); } With this I can create a service that supports both versions. This actually works, and it looks fine when testing from soapUI. However, when I create a client in Visual Studio using "Add Service Reference", VS disregards the namespaces and simply sees two interfaces with the same name. In order to differentiate them, VS adds "1" to the name of one of them. I end up with proxies called ServiceReference.VersionedServiceClient and ServiceReference.VersionedService1Client Now it's not easy for anybody to see which is the newer version. Should I give the interfaces different names? E.g IVersionedService1 IVersionedService2 or IVersionedService/2010/01/14 IVersionedService/2010/02/21 Doesn't this defeat the purpose of the namespace? Should I put them in different service classes and get a unique URL for each version?

    Read the article

  • How to set WS-SecurityPolicy in an inbound CXF service in Mule?

    - by Brakara
    When configuring the service for handling UsernameToken and signatures, it's setup like this: <service name="serviceName"> <inbound> <cxf:inbound-endpoint address="someUrl" protocolConnector="httpsConnector" > <cxf:inInterceptors> <spring:bean class="org.apache.cxf.binding.soap.saaj.SAAJInInterceptor" /> <spring:bean class="org.apache.cxf.ws.security.wss4j.WSS4JInInterceptor"> <spring:constructor-arg> <spring:map> <spring:entry key="action" value="UsernameToken Timestamp Signature" /> <spring:entry key="passwordCallbackRef" value-ref="serverCallback" /> <spring:entry key="signaturePropFile" value="wssecurity.properties" /> </spring:map> </spring:constructor-arg> </spring:bean> </cxf:inInterceptors> </cxf:inbound-endpoint> </inbound> </service> But how is it possible to create a policy of what algorithms that are allowed, and what parts of the message that should be signed?

    Read the article

  • How to specify a parameter as part of every web service call?

    - by LES2
    Currently, each web service for our application has a user parameter that is added for every method. For example: @WebService public interface FooWebService { @WebMethod public Foo getFoo(@WebParam(name="alwaysHere",header=true,partName="alwaysHere") String user, @WebParam(name="fooId") Long fooId); @WebMethod public Result deletetFoo(@WebParam(name="alwaysHere",header=true,partName="alwaysHere") String user, @WebParam(name="fooId") Long fooId); // ... } There could be twenty methods in a service, each with the first parameter as user. And there could be twenty web services. We don't actually use the 'user' argument in the implementations - in fact, I don't know why it's there - but I wasn't involved in the design, and the person that put it there had a reason (I hope). Anyway, I'm trying to straighten out this Big Ball of Mud. I have already come a long way by wrapping the web services by a Spring proxy, which allows me to do some before-and-after processing in an interceptor (before there were at least 20 lines of copy-pasted boiler plate per method). I'm wondering if there's some kind of "message header" I can apply to the method or package and that can be accessed by some type of handler or something outside of each web service method. Thanks in advance for the advice, LES

    Read the article

  • WCF HttpClient Error calling a RESTful WCF Service - Cannot write more bytes to the buffer than the configured maximum buffer size: 65536

    - by Justin Hoffman
    Using the HttpClient API from wcf.codeplex.com, you may encounter this error if respones are too large.   Cannot write more bytes to the buffer than the configured maximum buffer size: 65536 In order to increase the size of the Response Buffer, just increase the MaxReseponseContentBufferSize as shown below. Increase it to something larger than the default: 65536 depending on your response sizes. var client = new HttpClient { MaxResponseContentBufferSize = 196608, BaseAddress = new Uri("http://myservice/service1/") };

    Read the article

  • The Dangers of Vertical Video; A Public Service Announcement [Video]

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    According to the puppets in this tongue-in-cheek PSA, you’d better start shooting your video in the right orientation or very bad things–potentially involving George Lucas–will come to pass. [via Mashable] HTG Explains: What Is Windows RT and What Does It Mean To Me? HTG Explains: How Windows 8′s Secure Boot Feature Works & What It Means for Linux Hack Your Kindle for Easy Font Customization

    Read the article

  • Are there well-known examples of web products that were killed by slow service?

    - by Jeremy Wadhams
    It's a basic tenet of UX design that users prefer fast pages. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/response-times.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/01/technology/impatient-web-users-flee-slow-loading-sites.html?pagewanted=all It's supposedly even baked into Google's ranking algorithm now: fast sites rank higher, all else being equal. But are there well known examples of web services where the popular narrative is "it was great, but it was so slow people took their money elsewhere"? I can pretty easily think of example problems with scale (Twitter's fail whale) or reliability (Netflix and Pinterest outages caused by a single datacenter in a storm). But can (lack of) speed really kill?

    Read the article

  • Web reference problem on WCF

    - by kaivalya
    I have a WCF service which I am able to connect to from my web application and get data. I now added a web reference to this wcf project to a wsdl file that a shipping company provides. Intention is to get shipping quotes.. I am able to access the objects that are generated from this wsdl file but when I call service.Authenticate("DEMO"); method almost nothing happens. I debug and see the debugger continue to the next lines but there is no change on service parameters and service.isauthorized is null.. Can you lead me to how I should debug this further and things I should check, or if there are additional steps that I need to ensure to have a web reference working on wcf app Thanks using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Runtime.Serialization; using System.ServiceModel; using System.Text; using ShippingCalculator.com.freight.api; namespace ShippingCalculator { public class ShippingService : IShippingService { freight_service service = new freight_service(); public string GetData(int value) { service.setConnectionType(".net"); service.Authenticate("DEMO"); OriginRequest origin = new OriginRequest(); origin.zip = "60101"; DestinationRequest destination = new DestinationRequest(); destination.zip = "10001"; PackageRequest package = new PackageRequest(); package.weight = "10"; ShipmentInfoRequest shipmentInfo = new ShipmentInfoRequest(); shipmentInfo.ship_date = DateTime.Now.AddDays(5); service.setOrigin(origin); service.setDestination(destination); service.setPackage(package); service.setShipmentInfo(shipmentInfo); Quote quote = service.getQuote(); return string.Format("Quote Number: {0}<br /> ", quote.QuoteNumber); } } } using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; using ShippingTestApp.ShippingServiceReference; namespace ShippingTestApp.Controllers { [HandleError] public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { ShippingServiceClient shipClient = new ShippingServiceClient(); shipClient.GetData(0); ViewData["Message"] = shipClient.GetData(0); return View(); } } }

    Read the article

  • Customer retention - why most companies have it wrong

    - by Michel Adar
    At least in the US market it is quite common for service companies to offer an initially discounted price to new customers. While this may attract new customers and robe customers from competitors, it is my argument that it is a bad strategy for the company. This strategy gives an incentive to change companies and a disincentive to stay with the company. From the point of view of the customer, after 6 months of being a customer the company rewards the loyalty by raising the price. A better strategy would be to reward customers for staying with the company. For example, by lowering the cost by 5% every year (compound discount so it does never get to zero). This is a very rational thing to do for the company. Acquiring new customers and setting up their service is expensive, new customers also tend to use more of the common resources like customer service channels. It is probably true for most companies that the cost of providing service to a customer of 10 years is lower than providing the same service in the first year of a customer's tenure. It is only logical to pass these savings to the customer. From the customer point of view, the competition would have to offer something very attractive, whether in terms of price or service, in order for the customer to switch. Such a policy would give an advantage to the first mover, but would probably force the competitors to follow suit. Overall, I would expect that this would reduce the mobility in the market, increase loyalty, increase the investment of companies in loyal customers and ultimately, increase competition for providing a better service. Competitors may even try to break the scheme by offering customers the porting of their tenure, but that would not work that well because it would disenchant existing customers and would be costly, assuming that it is costlier to serve a customer through installation and first year. What do you think? Is this better than using "save offers" to retain flip-floppers?

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice to do SOA exception handling?

    - by sun1991
    Here's some interesting debate going on between me and my colleague when coming to handle SOA exceptions: On one side, I support what Juval Lowy said in Programming WCF Services 3rd Edition: As stated at the beginning of this chapter, it is a common illusion that clients care about errors or have anything meaningful to do when they occur. Any attempt to bake such capabilities into the client creates an inordinate degree of coupling between the client and the object, raising serious design questions. How could the client possibly know more about the error than the service, unless it is tightly coupled to it? What if the error originated several layers below the service—should the client be coupled to those lowlevel layers? Should the client try the call again? How often and how frequently? Should the client inform the user of the error? Is there a user? By having all service exceptions be indistinguishable from one another, WCF decouples the client from the service. The less the client knows about what happened on the service side, the more decoupled the interaction will be. On the other side, here's what my colleague suggest: I believe it’s simply incorrect, as it does not align with best practices in building a service oriented architecture and it ignores the general idea that there are problems that users are able to recover from, such as not keying a value correctly. If we considered only systems exceptions, perhaps this idea holds, but systems exceptions are only part of the exception domain. User recoverable exceptions are the other part of the domain and are likely to happen on a regular basis. I believe the correct way to build a service oriented architecture is to map user recoverable situations to checked exceptions, then to marshall each checked exception back to the client as a unique exception that client application programmers are able to handle appropriately. Marshall all runtime exceptions back to the client as a system exception, along with the stack trace so that it is easy to troubleshoot the root cause. I'd like to know what you think about this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • "The protocol 'net.msmq' is not supported."

    - by Randolpho St. John
    OMG, a new lesson! Will wonders never cease? So I ran into an interesting issue setting up a WCF service to consume an MSMQ queue. I won't bother you with the details of how to actually build a WCF/MSMQ service; there are plenty of tutorials on the subject. I want to share with you an interesting error that I ran into and the surprisingly simple fix. The error occurs when attempting to generate a Service Reference or even simply browsing to the WSDL of your WCF/MSMQ service in the form of a YSOD with the following error: "The protocol 'net.msmq' is not supported." After a lot of Googling on the subject turning up plenty of questions with the same error but no answers. So I went digging into some application level config files on a server that already had a WCF/MSMQ service successfully set up by the network admin, and the answer was amazingly simple: If you are hosting an MSMQ/WCF service in IIS, you have to tell IIS to allow net.msmq protocol. It's in the advanced settings for the application or site in which you are hosting the service. .... aaaand, that's it.

    Read the article

  • How to model has_many with polymorphism?

    - by Daniel Abrahamsson
    I've run into a situation that I am not quite sure how to model. Suppose I have a User class, and a user has many services. However, these services are quite different, for example a MailService and a BackupService, so single table inheritance won't do. Instead, I am thinking of using polymorphic associations together with an abstract base class: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :services end class Service < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :user_id, :implementation_id, :implementation_type belongs_to :user belongs_to :implementation, :polymorphic = true delegate :common_service_method, :name, :to => :implementation end #Base class for service implementations class ServiceImplementation < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :user_id, :on => :create has_one :service, :as => :implementation has_one :user, :through => :service after_create :create_service_record #Tell Rails this class does not use a table. def self.abstract_class? true end #Default name implementation. def name self.class.name end protected #Sets up a service object def create_service_record service = Service.new(:user_id => user_id) service.implementation = self service.save! end end class MailService < ServiceImplementation #validations, etc... def common_service_method puts "MailService implementation of common service method" end end #Example usage MailService.create(..., :user_id => user.id) BackupService.create(...., :user_id => user.id) user.services.each do |s| puts "#{user.name} is using #{s.name}" end #Daniel is using MailService, Daniel is using BackupService So, is this the best solution? Or even a good one? How have you solved this kind of problem?

    Read the article

  • Double hop SQL delegation not working

    - by eKoz
    I've been trying to diagnose this for some time, and unfortunately Im still getting the dreaded anonymous logon issue when trying to connect to a sql db as a domain user. Steps taken: App Pool created with delegation service acct Site / Virtual dir running with Integrated Windows auth only Made sure site itself can use kerberos KB 215383 Service acct added to IIS_WPG group Service acct added to "act as part of operating system" under Local Security settings Service acct added to Log on as service under Local Security Settings HTTP SPN set for web address + service account (and FQDN) MSSQLSvc SPN set for sql box and domain acct sql is running as Trust for delegation turned on service acct, specified services, and sql service acct After all this, Im still getting the exact same error from when I started. Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. This has advanced my balding by at least 5 years so far. I would greatly appreciate any additional tips on diagnosing or setting up.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Lazy content loading thought WCF REST service.

    Using WCF REST services to implement dynatree plug-in of jQuery for Lazy loading of child nodes....Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • How do you keep SOA DRY?

    - by TaylorOtwell
    In our organization, we've shifted to a more "service oriented architecture". To give an example, let's assume we need to retrieve a "Quote" object. This quote has a shipper, a consignee, phone numbers, contacts, email addresses, and other location information. In other words, a Quote object is made up of many other objects. So, it seems like it would make sense to make a "Quote Retrieval Service". In our situation, we've accomplished this by creating a .NET solution and writing the service. The service API looks something like this (in pseudo-code): Function GetQuote(String ID) Returns Quote So, so far so good. Now, when this service is consumed, to keep things "de-coupled", we are creating essentially a duplicate of the Quote object and mapping from the QuoteService version of the Quote into the consumer's version of the Quote. In many cases, these classes will have the exact same properties. So, if the Quote service is consumed by 5 other applications, we would have 6 definitions of what a "Quote" is. One for each consumer, and one for the service. This feels wrong. I thought code was supposed to be DRY, but it seems like our method of SOA is forcing us to create tons of duplicated class definitions. What are we doing wrong, or is the code duplication just a "necessary evil" of SOA?

    Read the article

  • How to Resolve a Transformation Service with BRE that occurs after an Orchestration in an Itinerary?

    - by Maxime Labelle
    In trying to implement simple integration patterns with Biztalk ESB Toolkit 2.0, I'm facing a problem trying to resolve a Transformation Itinerary Service that occurs after an Orchestration. I'm using the BRE Resolver to execute rules that need to inspect the Context Message Type property to determine the appropriate map to use. However, once the message reaches the step in the Itinerary associated with the Transformation Service, the map fails to execute. From careful investigation, it appears that the message type is not supplied to the "Resolution" object that is used internally by the BRE resolver. Indeed, since the message leaving the preceding Orchestration is typed System.Xml.XmlDocument, the type of the message is "demoted" from the context. By tracking rules engine execution, I can observe that the type of the message is indeed lost when reaching the BRE resolver. The type of the message is empty, whereas the strongly-typed of the document is Microsoft.XLANGs.BaseTypes.Any. The Orchestration service that I use is taken straight from the samples that ship with ESB Toolkit 2.0. Is there a way to perform Context-Based BRE resolution after an Orchestration in an Itinerary?

    Read the article

  • Constituent Experience Counts In Public Sector

    - by Michael Seback
      Businesses and government organizations are operating in an era of the empowered customer where service  and communication channels are challenged every day.  Consumers in the private sector have high expectations from purchasing gifts online, reading reviews on social sites, and expecting the companies they do business with to know and reward them.   In the Public Sector, constituents also expect government organizations to provide consistent and timely service across agencies and touch points.  Examples include requesting critical city services, applying for social assistance or reviewing insurance plans for a health insurance exchange. If an individual does not receive the services they need at the right time and place, it can create a dire situation – involving housing, food or healthcare assistance. Government organizations need to deliver a fast, reliable and personalized experience to constituents. Look at a few recent statistics from a Government focused survey: How do you define good customer service? 70 % improved services, 48% shortest time to provide information, 44% shortest time to resolve complaints What are ways/opportunities to improve customer service? 69% increased collaboration across agencies and 41% increased customer service channels Are you using data collected to make informed decisionsto improve customer service efforts? 39% data collection is limited, not used to improve decision making Source: Re-Imagining Customer Service in Government, 2012 Click here to see the highlights.  Would you like to get started – read Eight Steps to great constituent experiences for government.

    Read the article

  • Solving &ldquo;XmlSchemaException: The global element '&lt;elementName&gt;' has already been declare

    - by ChrisD
    I recently encountered this error when I attempted to consume a new hosted WCF service.  The service used the Request/Response model and had been properly decorated.  The response and request objects were marked as DataContracts and had a specified namespace.   My WCF service interface was marked as a ServiceContract and shared the namespace attribute value.   Everything should have been fine, right? [ServiceContract(Namespace = "http://schemas.myclient.com/09/12")] public interface IProductActivationService { [OperationContract] ActivateSoftwareResponse ActivateSoftware(ActivateSoftwareRequest request); } well, not exactly.  Apparently the WSDL generator was having an issue: System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchemaException: The global element 'http://schemas.myclient.com/09/12:ActivateSoftwareResponse' has already been declared. After digging I’ve found the problem; the WSDL generator has some reserved suffixes for its entities, including Response, Request, Solicit (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms731045.aspx).  The error message is actually the result of a naming conflict.  The WSDL generator uses the namespace of the service to build its reserved types.  The service contract and data contract share a namespace, which coupled with the response/request name suffixes I was using in my class names, resulted in the SchemaException. The Fix: Two options: Rename my data contract entities to use a non-reserved keyword suffix (i.e.  change ActivateSoftwareResponse to ActivateSoftwareResp). or; Change the namespace of the data contracts to differ from the service contract namespace. I chose option 2 and changed all my data contracts to use a “http://schemas.myclient.com/09/12/data” namespace value. This avoided a name collision and I was able to produce my WSDL and consume my service.

    Read the article

  • Exposing a service to external systems - How should I design the contract?

    - by Larsi
    Hi! I know this question is been asked before here but still I'm not sure what to select. My service will be called from many 3 party system in the enterprise. I'm almost sure the information the service will collect (MyBigClassWithAllInfo) will change during the products lifetime. Is it still a good idea to expose objects? This is basically what my two alternatives: [ServiceContract] public interface ICollectStuffService { [OperationContract] SetDataResponseMsg SetData(SetDataRequestMsg dataRequestMsg); } // Alternative 1: Put all data inside a xml file [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public string Body { get; set; } [DataMember] public string OtherPropertiesThatMightBeHandy { get; set; } // ?? } // Alternative 2: Expose the objects [DataContract] public class SetDataRequestMsg { [DataMember] public Header Header { get; set; } [DataMember] public MyBigClassWithAllInfo ExposedObject { get; set; } } public class SetDataResponseMsg { [DataMember] public ServiceError Error { get; set; } } The xml file would look like this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <Message>   <Header>     <InfoAboutTheSender>...</InfoAboutTheSender>   </Header>   <StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo>   <stuff1>...</stuff1> </StuffToCollectWithAllTheInfo> </Message> Any thought on how this service should be implemented? Thanks Larsi

    Read the article

  • Accessing Secure Web Services from ADF Mobile

    - by Shay Shmeltzer
    Most of the enterprise Web services you'll access are going to be secured - meaning they'll require you to pass a user/password in order to get to their data.  If you never created a secured Web service, it's simple in JDeveloper! For the below video I just right clicked on a Java class that I exposed as a Web service, and chose  "Web Service Properties" and then checked the "oracle/wss_username_token_service_policy" box from the list of options (that's the option supported by ADF Mobile right now): In the demo below we are going to use a "remote" login server that does the authentication of the user/pass.The easiest way to "create" a remote login server is to create a "regular" web ADF application, secure it, and deploy it on a server. The secured ADF application can just require ADF Authentication with a simple HTTP Basic Authentication - basically the next two images in the Application->Secure->Configure ADF Security menu wizard. ok - so now you have a secured ADF application - deploy it on a server and get the URL for that application.  From this point on you'll see the process in the video which deals with the configuration of your ADF Mobile app. First you'll need to enable security for your ADF mobile application, so it will prompt users to provide a user/pass combination. You'll also need to configure security on specific features. And you can have them use remote login pointing to your regular secured ADF application. Next define your Web service data control. Right click on the web service data control to "define Web Service Security". You'll also need to define the adfCredentialStoreKey property for the Web Service data control in the connections.xml file. This should be it. Here is the flow: If you haven't already - you can read more about this in the Mobile developer guide, and Andrejus has a sample for you.

    Read the article

  • How to handle fine grained field-based ACL permissions in a RESTful service?

    - by Jason McClellan
    I've been trying to design a RESTful API and have had most of my questions answered, but there is one aspect of permissions that I'm struggling with. Different roles may have different permissions and different representations of a resource. For example, an Admin or the user himself may see more fields in his own User representation vs another less-privileged user. This is achieved simply by changing the representation on the backend, ie: deciding whether or not to include those fields. Additionally, some actions may be taken on a resource by some users and not by others. This is achieved by deciding whether or not to include those action items as links, eg: edit and delete links. A user who does not have edit permissions will not have an edit link. That covers nearly all of my permission use cases, but there is one that I've not quite figured out. There are some scenarios whereby for a given representation of an object, all fields are visible for two or more roles, but only a subset of those roles my edit certain fields. An example: { "person": { "id": 1, "name": "Bob", "age": 25, "occupation": "software developer", "phone": "555-555-5555", "description": "Could use some sunlight.." } } Given 3 users: an Admin, a regular User, and Bob himself (also a regular User), I need to be able to convey to the front end that: Admins may edit all fields, Bob himself may edit all fields, but a regular User, while they can view all fields, can only edit the description field. I certainly don't want the client to have to make the determination (or even, for that matter, to have any notion of the roles involved) but I do need a way for the backend to convey to the client which fields are editable. I can't simply use a combination of representation (the fields returned for viewing) and links (whether or not an edit link is availble) in this scenario since it's more finely grained. Has anyone solved this elegantly without adding the logic directly to the client?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >