[Rets-dev] Google Base Housing vs. RETS

[JP Fielding]

i dont believe im confused, im simply agreeing with the point of the
original poster, which is that up/downloading to (only) gbase is easier than
pulling from rets.  but you are correct, a fair comparison would compare the
interoperability of rets vendors to cross vendor search engine uploads.
that said, most search engines will accept a csv via ftp that maps to their
field set.  i havent seen anyone other than gbase make it available via an
api after that.


On 3/15/07, dbt <retsdev at develest.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 11:17:06AM -0400, JP Fielding wrote:
> > btw, this (to me at least) isnt an i hate rets thread so much as
> comparing
> > some _our_ problems with the ideas of one of the largest collections of
> phds
> > on the planet.
> >
> > i think hes saying that gbase has a smaller barrier to entry than rets
> from
> > a client perspective.   as a rets client user, i have to agree.  i
> currently
> > maintain the retsclient java api originally started by cart.
>
> Glad it didn't die. :)
>
> > it works
> > great, but keeping it working transparently across each vendors
> > interpretation of the RETS spec is sometimes tricky.   not only that,
> some
> > things we have to do cant go into the spec.  for instance, one vendor,
> has
> > search limits, but doesnt provide for paging.   so the mls (their
> customer
> > as well) asked us to implement a custom paging mechanism that basically
> does
> > a binary split based on entry dates until we get under their size
> limits.
> >
> > a single client server interaction is not tricky, making use of it
> > transparently across each vendor is.
>
> The spec has addressed it -- they've gone outside the spec and they're
> not providing what the spec makes available and what their customers want.
>
> > that said, ive played with the gbase api's, the java based api, the
> direct
> > http api, and an htmlunit based client that creates a browser and walks
> > their sites.   their site itself will be very interesting _when its
> done_,
> > but there are still a few features missing and outright bugs.   but in
> > general, the concept is simple, you submit a _minimal_ dataset.  enough
> to
> > present a search result, then a user clicks it and goes directly to the
> > brokers homepage.
>
> Sure, but again, this it's easy to code against a single application.
> Don't confuse that with an interoperable standard, which is the best
> you're going to get unless there's a centralized provider of this
> kind of data -- and a search API.
>
> That's a business and political problem, not a protocol problem.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rets.org/pipermail/rets-dev/attachments/20070315/2fa64642/attachment.html