Hi James,
Yes. I'm sorry that this is a bit tight. Unfortunately, I think this is about as late as we can manage. I was just writing an email to you to check who your clients are and what we may be able to do to help. SNH WIMBY are aware of the change but there is also GIGL WIMBY and the LRC screening client that I know about. Any others?
Andy

Hi Nick,

it sounds like you are using our java jar file to access the web services in your code.  If so, then you don't have to consume the WSDL, just download and use the new jar file that Andy mentions above.  As you rightly point out though, this new jar file will give you lists not arrays, making the future much better, but the short term a bit of a headache as you have to do some re-coding.

If you are consuming the WSDL directly (which I don't think you are) you will have exactly the same access to the new webservices as you did for the old web services - unless the technology you use to consume them has changed.

The actual responses you get back from the web services (the xml data about species and stuff) is just the same as before.

Hope that helps - cheers, Jon

Andy

With the new infrastructure in place will it allow for the operational methodology of webservices to be changed/improved ? I am particularly thinking about the operation of the webservices dictionary where currently it only returns a positive result if the particular species name which is queried has records on the Gateway.

Much better would be for the dictionary query to return a result if teh name is in the dictionary regardless of whether the Gateway holds such species records or not.

Currently, we are finding this restriction somewhat of a problem. Recorders wish to put records in to our online recording facility (RODIS) which uses searches of the webservices dictionary to provide and match valid species names. Unfortunately some species are not showing as the name is not available due to the fact the the Gateway currently does not have records for these species - which means that the recorders can NOT get these records into rECOrd and thence can not get them into the Gateway. Somewhat of a circular problem methinks !!!!

Cheers

Steve
www.rECOrd-LRC.co.uk

Hi all,

Sorry for the delay in my reply and thanks, Jon, for answering the queries. I think I may have spread a bit of confusion about arrays and lists.

The XML format for the web services response remains the same. However, we found that when we re-created the jar and dll for the gateway library, using newer versions of the tools to do this, the WSDL was interpreted differently. Some class names changed and some return types.

It's likely that if you re-compile proxy classes from the WSDL automatically using your IDE  (e.g. netbeans or visual studio) and you're using a newer version of that IDE, then you will probably find the same thing.

So, the Java and .NET tools to convert WSDLs to classes have changed in the two years or so since we last created the clients.

If you aren't using our jar or dll and if you can edit your code directly to change the address of the WSDL then you won't have to do anything else. So, for PHP, nothing should have changed.

Sorry, for my clumsy explanation earlier. Hope this one is better!

Andy

Thanks for that Andy. Very good to know it is now on the development list and seen as a requirement.

I will look forward greatly to the implementation.

Thanks once again..

Steve

Hi,

no, we are dependent on our local computer support, and they're really busy with moving loads of other stuff over to Wallingford as well as getting ready to move the NBN.  They simply haven't done it yet, which gives us a few days grace - but no-one should depend on the old web services, they are about to be turned off.

Cheers, Jon