Briefcase question

Development
1

With briefcase when it says target is aggregate 1.0. I'm assuming this
means any server that has the same end points as aggregate. Ie) if we
could point it to our own backend as long as it supported the same
submission url api as that used in aggregate 1.0?

Is there an openrosa term for all of this?

Thanks,

Matt

2

Also I see there is formuploader in the download section on ODK. What's
the difference between that and briefcase?

··· On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Matt Berg wrote:

With briefcase when it says target is aggregate 1.0. I'm assuming this
means any server that has the same end points as aggregate. Ie) if we
could point it to our own backend as long as it supported the same
submission url api as that used in aggregate 1.0?

Is there an openrosa term for all of this?

Thanks,

Matt

3

Form Uploader is a different main() entry point into the same set of code
as Briefcase; it just offers a reduced interface and functionality.

ODK Briefcase relies on extra (non-OpenRosa) functionality in ODK Aggregate
to do some of its bookkeeping. It likely won't work going forward - I
hadn't intended to ensure any cross-compatibility between it and other
tools, but let me know where it breaks for you; there might be an easy
fix. The key requirement for cross-platform use would be having all
systems support the API that lists available submissions on the server.

The key features not covered by OpenRosa are:

  • API for listing available submissions on ODK Aggregate is not an OR
    standard
  • downloading submissions from ODK Aggregate -- these don't preserve xmlns;
    the target server would have to be equally lax with xmlns handling
  • uploading forms and media -- this is not an OR standard. It is very
    similar to the submission standard, but with differences.
  • uploading submissions -- I will be adding logic to see what submissions
    are already on ODK Aggregate (by listing available submissions) to filter
    what submissions will be uploaded.
  • uploading submissions -- when a submission is successfully uploaded, ODK
    Briefcase expects the response XML to contain:
...

The code currently expects the submissionMetadata tag. During the upload
process, the instanceID defined in the submission is promoted up to be an
attribute of the top-level tag in the files stored on your local system.
This enables form submissions that don't specify instanceIDs to be given
the instanceID assigned to them from their first server upload, and then
that id is preserved across all future uploads/downloads (providing
traceability and de-duplication support).

··· ------ Mitch

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Matt Berg mlberg@gmail.com wrote:

Also I see there is formuploader in the download section on ODK. What's
the difference between that and briefcase?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Matt Berg mlberg@gmail.com wrote:

With briefcase when it says target is aggregate 1.0. I'm assuming this
means any server that has the same end points as aggregate. Ie) if we
could point it to our own backend as long as it supported the same
submission url api as that used in aggregate 1.0?

Is there an openrosa term for all of this?

Thanks,

Matt

--
Mitch Sundt
Software Engineer
University of Washington
mitchellsundt@gmail.com

4

Form Uploader is intended for upload of multimedia forms to Aggregate.
These include lots of files in their -media folder.

Form Uploader is a different main() entry point into the same set of code
as Briefcase; it just offers a reduced interface and functionality.

ODK Briefcase relies on extra (non-OpenRosa) functionality in ODK
Aggregate to do some of its bookkeeping. It likely won't work going
forward - I hadn't intended to ensure any cross-compatibility between it
and other tools, but let me know where it breaks for you; there might be an
easy fix. The key requirement for cross-platform use would be having all
systems support the API that lists available submissions on the server.

The key features not covered by OpenRosa are:

  • API for listing available submissions on ODK Aggregate is not an OR
    standard
  • downloading submissions from ODK Aggregate -- these don't preserve
    xmlns; the target server would have to be equally lax with xmlns handling
  • uploading forms and media -- this is not an OR standard. It is very
    similar to the submission standard, but with differences.
  • uploading submissions -- I will be adding logic to see what submissions
    are already on ODK Aggregate (by listing available submissions) to filter
    what submissions will be uploaded.
  • uploading submissions -- when a submission is successfully uploaded,
    ODK Briefcase expects the response XML to contain:

...
<odk:submissionMetadata xmlns:odk="http://www.opendatakit.org/xforms"
instanceID="..." submissionDate="..." />

The code currently expects the submissionMetadata tag. During the upload
process, the instanceID defined in the submission is promoted up to be an
attribute of the top-level tag in the files stored on your local system.
This enables form submissions that don't specify instanceIDs to be given
the instanceID assigned to them from their first server upload, and then
that id is preserved across all future uploads/downloads (providing
traceability and de-duplication support).

Mitch

Also I see there is formuploader in the download section on ODK. What's
the difference between that and briefcase?

With briefcase when it says target is aggregate 1.0. I'm assuming this
means any server that has the same end points as aggregate. Ie) if we
could point it to our own backend as long as it supported the same
submission url api as that used in aggregate 1.0?

··· On Monday, December 19, 2011, Mitch S wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Matt Berg wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Matt Berg wrote: >>> Is there an openrosa term for all of this? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Matt > > > > -- > Mitch Sundt > Software Engineer > University of Washington > mitchellsundt@gmail.com >