On May 7, 6:36*pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> On 5/7/2012 10:00 AM, Davej wrote:
> > On May 6, 8:43 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> *wrote:
> >> On 5/6/2012 9:19 PM, Davej wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> Ah, it is working until I throw some sort of exception reading the
> >>> database with SqlDataReader or improperly passing the result array
> >>> back. At that point everything dies -- including the sessions.
>
> >> The session should not be invalidated due to an exception.
>
> >> But obviously you need to handle the exception properly.
>
> >> Would it be possible to expose the data as a web service
> >> instead of as a web page (that would make many things
> >> easier client side)?
>
> > I was confused by web services so I went down the path of "screen
> > scraping" with the idea that I could perhaps switch over later.
>
> I think it would have been way easier for you with web services.
>
> WCF is a bit complex, but there are alternatives:
> * oldfashioned .asmx web services
> * a simple web handler (.ashx)
>
> Arne

I will have to read up on those. I wanted to avoid just using some
mysterious library that would magically do everything. I am still
trying to grasp some of the underlying limitations and issues of my
simple-minded approach; for example sending numbers is no problem, but
strings have to be sent with caution, particularly in the download
direction. In my application strings are not too important, but I have
some strings come back in the debugging messages and I did include a
"chat" feature. Although I have not tested this I'm guessing that
"<table>" or "</html>" would be bad sequences to find in a chat
message.

On 5/8/2012 6:35 AM, Davej wrote:
> On May 7, 6:36 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 5/7/2012 10:00 AM, Davej wrote:
>>> On May 6, 8:43 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>> On 5/6/2012 9:19 PM, Davej wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> Ah, it is working until I throw some sort of exception reading the
>>>>> database with SqlDataReader or improperly passing the result array
>>>>> back. At that point everything dies -- including the sessions.
>>
>>>> The session should not be invalidated due to an exception.
>>
>>>> But obviously you need to handle the exception properly.
>>
>>>> Would it be possible to expose the data as a web service
>>>> instead of as a web page (that would make many things
>>>> easier client side)?
>>
>>> I was confused by web services so I went down the path of "screen
>>> scraping" with the idea that I could perhaps switch over later.
>>
>> I think it would have been way easier for you with web services.
>>
>> WCF is a bit complex, but there are alternatives:
>> * oldfashioned .asmx web services
>> * a simple web handler (.ashx)
>
> I will have to read up on those. I wanted to avoid just using some
> mysterious library that would magically do everything. I am still
> trying to grasp some of the underlying limitations and issues of my
> simple-minded approach; for example sending numbers is no problem, but
> strings have to be sent with caution, particularly in the download
> direction. In my application strings are not too important, but I have
> some strings come back in the debugging messages and I did include a
> "chat" feature. Although I have not tested this I'm guessing that
> "<table>" or"</html>" would be bad sequences to find in a chat
> message.

A simple web handler (.ashx) does not contain much magic.

Arne

On 5/10/2012 2:36 PM, Davej wrote:
> On May 8, 7:57 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 5/8/2012 6:35 AM, Davej wrote:
>>> On May 7, 6:36 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2012 10:00 AM, Davej wrote:
>>>>> On May 6, 8:43 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>>>> Would it be possible to expose the data as a web service
>>>>>> instead of as a web page (that would make many things
>>>>>> easier client side)?
>>
>>>>> I was confused by web services so I went down the path of "screen
>>>>> scraping" with the idea that I could perhaps switch over later.
>>
>>>> I think it would have been way easier for you with web services.
>>
>>>> WCF is a bit complex, but there are alternatives:
>>>> * oldfashioned .asmx web services
>>>> * a simple web handler (.ashx)
>>
>>> I will have to read up on those. I wanted to avoid just using some
>>> mysterious library that would magically do everything. I am still
>>> trying to grasp some of the underlying limitations and issues of my
>>> simple-minded approach; for example sending numbers is no problem, but
>>> strings have to be sent with caution, particularly in the download
>>> direction. In my application strings are not too important, but I have
>>> some strings come back in the debugging messages and I did include a
>>> "chat" feature. Although I have not tested this I'm guessing that
>>> "<table>" or"</html>" would be bad sequences to find in a chat
>>> message.
>>
>> A simple web handler (.ashx) does not contain much magic.
>
> If it does not force me to use XML I will give it a try next week.

You can do XML, JSON, CSV or whatever format you like.

Unless bandwidth is a primary concern, then I believe
XML would be a nice format.

Arne

On May 14, 6:30*pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> On 5/10/2012 2:36 PM, Davej wrote:
> > On May 8, 7:57 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> *wrote:
>
> >> A simple web handler (.ashx) does not contain much magic.
>
> > If it does not force me to use XML I will give it a try next week.
>
> You can do XML, JSON, CSV or whatever format you like.
>
> Unless bandwidth is a primary concern, then I believe
> XML would be a nice format.
>
> Arne

Well, I am still trying to get my basic functionality working, but if
I try a web service option I would want to keep the simple
(concatenated/delimited strings with a simple header) message format
that I am using now. Maybe add a wrapper if that is required. I am
curious about how major or minor the change over might be. I noticed
that there are apparently some changes that need to be made to the
web.config file for a web service. Thanks.

On 5/15/2012 11:09 AM, Davej wrote:
> On May 14, 6:30 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 5/10/2012 2:36 PM, Davej wrote:
>>> On May 8, 7:57 pm, Arne Vajhøj<a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>
>>>> A simple web handler (.ashx) does not contain much magic.
>>
>>> If it does not force me to use XML I will give it a try next week.
>>
>> You can do XML, JSON, CSV or whatever format you like.
>>
>> Unless bandwidth is a primary concern, then I believe
>> XML would be a nice format.
>
> Well, I am still trying to get my basic functionality working, but if
> I try a web service option I would want to keep the simple
> (concatenated/delimited strings with a simple header) message format
> that I am using now. Maybe add a wrapper if that is required. I am
> curious about how major or minor the change over might be. I noticed
> that there are apparently some changes that need to be made to the
> web.config file for a web service.

That is only for WCF.

Neither old style .asmx nor simple web handlers .ashx
requires changes to web.config.

Arne