<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Community Server Issues - Part I</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx</link><description>Ok, seriously, I have encountered several problems on the web service APIs provided by Community Server during the process of creating this InfoPath blog client . It seems to me the forum at communityserver.org is not very active. Therefore I am posting</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Community Server Woes - Part 1</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#417151</link><pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 13:35:07 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:417151</guid><dc:creator>Don Demsak</dc:creator><description>Can anyone say Code First Versus Contract First?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This example is a great example of one of the major issues with the Code First approach that VS embraces, it hides the fact that a change to the underlying class will cause a break in the generated contract.  See Aaron Skonnard's Contract First Service Development articles in May and June 2005 MSDN Mag: &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/05/ServiceStation/default.aspx"&gt;http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/05/ServiceStation/default.aspx&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/06/ServiceStation/default.aspx"&gt;http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/06/ServiceStation/default.aspx&lt;/a&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Community Server Woes - Part 1</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#417157</link><pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 13:56:51 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:417157</guid><dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator><description>You are correct. You are not using the same version available for public download yet.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The web service API is something we did not have enough time to investigate properly in 1.0. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So in 1.1 we made a couple of changes and improvements. The goal is to lock the CS public API (web service included) by version 1.2 (late summer/early fall).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The reason for the above change was to make sure Blogs, Gallery and Forums (and others soon) can have a more &amp;quot;common&amp;quot; API. So if/when a gallery web service is published, ServiceCredentials will be re-used.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;HTH,&lt;br&gt;Scott</description></item><item><title>re: Community Server Woes - Part 1</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#417295</link><pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 20:42:59 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:417295</guid><dc:creator>Heath Stewart</dc:creator><description>You should be able to modify the client proxy and add fields for each element. With the right XmlElementAttribute, the field would not be null while the other one would.</description></item><item><title>re: Community Server Woes - Part 1</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#417323</link><pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 22:45:29 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:417323</guid><dc:creator>guowu</dc:creator><description>Don: Great articles.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Scott: thanks for taking time explaining this. It makes sense in your roadmap. I just hope changes in 1.2 will not be as dramatic as this time. I will have more to say in the coming posts.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Heaths: I thought about that. It may not be hard. But it definitely will get messy. You can try to unify the client proxy for the following to web referecne:&lt;br&gt;1) &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/blogservice.asmx"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/blogservice.asmx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;2) &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.trefry.net/blogs/blogservice.asmx"&gt;http://www.trefry.net/blogs/blogservice.asmx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;Please share with me if you do come up with something neat, :-)</description></item><item><title>Community Server Issues - Part II</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#440742</link><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2005 06:24:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:440742</guid><dc:creator>Guoqiang Wu's Blog</dc:creator><description>A while back, I complained about the big pain caused by the SOAP header change between Community Server...</description></item><item><title>re: Community Server Issues - Part I</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/guowu/archive/2005/05/13/417134.aspx#448169</link><pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2005 19:55:54 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:448169</guid><dc:creator>Kevin Daly</dc:creator><description>I've just hit this one, and frankly whatever the reason, it stinks.&lt;br&gt;I believe there is a responsibility to provide a degree of consistency for published APIs...but apparently the message should be &amp;quot;don't use the web service because we haven't finished playing with it&amp;quot;...but then MetaWeblog on the other hand has been provided as an add-on, so we can't count on it *being* added on...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;My patience is sorely tried.</description></item></channel></rss>