EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Tyrannis API Improvements

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Tyrannis API Improvements

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
MissyDark	Posted - 2010.05.17 22:19:00 - [31] Until I read this devblog I thought THIS was funny. Now I don't. Are you people insane, disregarding people privacy like that?
Krathos Morpheus Legion Infernal	Posted - 2010.05.17 22:28:00 - [32] Originally by: CCP Karuck Crawling EVE Gate is forbidden as part of our soon to be updated Terms of Service, and can be a basis for an account ban. Remember that everything you do on EVE Gate you do logged in as your account. What is going to prevent the use of trial/alt accounts to do it? They don't care if you ban them. Originally by: CCP Karuck You should be using the API when writing your tools, and if there is functionality on EVE Gate that is not on the API then that's something you should ask us to consider adding. I thought it was obvious and already asked for, but here it goes in case you haven't noticed: We want the functionality of full messages through the API. EVEwatch Sidebar soon "It is the unofficial force ù the Jita irregulars. "
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.05.17 22:49:00 - [33] Well if you take the words from the facebook founder, privacy is something of the last century and you should be publish everything about yourself to the net, including your credit card transactions. I hope CCP seriously reconsiders the publishing of contacts. that should be an opt-in option. If i enable publishing of my contacts on eve-gate, I wouldnt mind to share them via the limited api key. but the default should be hidden and limited to the full api key.
Matterick Boon Minmatar Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.17 23:01:00 - [34] Originally by: mkmin Quote: The Contacts API will require only a limited key Um... why? you CCP people are seriously giving a big 'screw you' to all our privacy concerns. Well, based on the way you're treating our privacy concerns you obviously consider people to be even less valuable than assets, so it should be no surprise you'd make valuable assets require the full, but the worthless people can be as freely available as possible. I mean why not make everyone's contacts require no API at all? Oh wait you did that for everyone in EVE with fail-spacebook on accident and didn't even bother apologizing about, or even admitting it. I could think of dozens of reasons why I wouldn't want my contacts on my limited API and not a single reason why I would. This concerns me too. Contacts should be full API. I can't think of a single reason why it should be given out with a limited API.
Mjana Switzerland EVE Corp.	Posted - 2010.05.18 00:06:00 - [35] Originally by: Matterick Boon This concerns me too. Contacts should be full API. I can't think of a single reason why it should be given out with a limited API. ^- This Originally by: mkmin Well, based on the way you're treating our privacy concerns you obviously consider people to be even less valuable than assets, so it should be no surprise you'd make valuable assets require the full, but the worthless people can be as freely available as possible. ^- And this I can't think of any reason either why contacts should be accessible through limited key. All the contact related stuff (calendar, mails) require full API key anyways (which is GOOD). Yes, the default for EVE Gate is that some people can see your contacts, but there you can at least change the settings. It just doesn't make sense being able to restrict access to contacts on EVE Gate but not having a choice when it comes to API. Either giving away all contacts info or not being able to use the API at all...
Verite Rendition Caldari F.R.E.E. Explorer Initiative Mercenaries	Posted - 2010.05.18 03:01:00 - [36] Originally by: Wollari Sadly you only released private/personal APIs. Which have no use for me atm. I would like to see more love for public apis. What about: System Indexes, Wars, Sovereignty Structures etc. I know that Starbases and Outpost APIs are important for Corp Management Tools and i'm all up for them, but people like me (DOTLAN EveMaps) who take only usage of the public API's won't be happy. I know you all fear that something could happen like with the dominion start, but I really would like to get in contact or an a discussion like the roundtable we had on the last fanfest and put in our experience and discuss future improvements and/or additions. I think you get a lot more feedback if you would ask the 3rd party devs: We would like to introduce these XYZ changes, what do you think about them? Useful? Concerns? rather then 'That's IT' and after the release revoke everything again. If I would need to sign a NDA to get in talk/touch/discussion with you guys, I would do it and a couple other devs too, I suppose. Get the discussion started with the devs and try to find out what people are really need. APIs for new features are always nice, but giving love to old features (contracts?) or APIs (sovereigntySystems) would be nice too. My last blog about my Wish List http://evemaps.dotlan.net/blog/2009/12/31/wishlist-for-2010/ And I would like to reiterate what Wollari is saying, particularly when it comes to the Sovereignty APIs. With Dominion we took a bit hit - you removed sov levels from the API and did not replace it with system index levels. So we can tell who owns a system but nothing about its index levels, something that's trivial to look up in-game. As it stands if Wollari wasn't approximating the strategic level by tracking when systems changed hands, then the Influence Map would be far less accurate. But Wollari shouldn't need to keep track of this stuff, it's all readily available data that should be available via API. As it stands we're barely getting by in this respect, and if we had the real index data we could be doing more interesting things and generate more accurate/meaningful maps. It's well known that the API team has a slow development cycle, so the fact that this wasn't fixed shortly after Dominion was unfortunate but not unexpected. But to go uncorrected for an entire expansion cycle represents a much bigger problem. If nothing else, it makes the API look neglected. Please listen to Wollari and the others. I'm pretty sure they won't bite off your heads, and they have a lot of good ideas that would improve the API if you can take the time to communicate with them. ---- FREE Explorer Lead Megalomanic EVE Null-Sec Player Influence Map http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Veritefw/FWinf
D'Kelle	Posted - 2010.05.18 03:03:00 - [37] Edited by: D''Kelle on 18/05/2010 03:05:03 Originally by: CCP Karuck Edited by: CCP Karuck on 17/05/2010 17:14:40 Originally by: Ix Forres On the topic of EVE mail, what is CCP's official stance on EVE Gate sc ra pers (bloody spam filter) and automation tools given that you are powerless to stop them? I say the latter merely as a statement of fact: If you consider them a problem, they're not going to go away any time soon. If you don't mind them, at least let EVE Gate authenticate users via HTTP BASIC or another method (OAuth2 for example) instead of forcing us back to the dark ages of sharing usernames and passwords. You will only annoy your users and severely negatively impact their security by encouraging them to share their logins with external sites and applications. Crawling EVE Gate is forbidden as part of our soon to be updated Terms of Service, and can be a basis for an account ban. Remember that everything you do on EVE Gate you do logged in as your account. You should be using the API when writing your tools, and if there is functionality on EVE Gate that is not on the API then that's something you should ask us to consider adding. Update: Sorry, I must have missed the reply above where some of you already pointed this out ;) Sorry! but do you seriously think the hackers and scammers are going to be seriously upset about a petty account ban. Eve gate is a nice idea but I really feel you have simply magnified the oportunity to have our Eve Accounts/info hacked, making this available via a public browser irrispective of personal pc security, you only have too look at the arms length list of fixes a certain browser company has to keep providing to realise how many devious ba***ds there are out there. Std browsers have more holes in them than people want to belive, so here`s hoping you have your systemsoild (not like some of the things in Eve that still need fixing years down the line,,sighs!) also your ability to compensate if it isn`t.. you have admitted you had to "beef" up the security processes in the game browser.
Dr BattleSmith PAX Interstellar Services	Posted - 2010.05.18 04:11:00 - [38] With oAuth we could add/attend events from 3rd party sites securely. Pity that EveGate is Web0.1 instead of Web2.0+ In todays world, to build such a flat static social network and API with zero interaction is just sad.
Dragonaire Caldari Corax. New Eden Retail Federation	Posted - 2010.05.18 05:25:00 - [39] First let's add my name to the list that thinks the contacts using the limited API key is a bad idea as both a third party developer and a player. Most people don't want to give out their limited key now to outside parties because they feel it allows more access then they like and this is going to make even fewer willing. Next let me say something on the planned changes to StarbaseDetails API. Catari Taga is right and <useStandingsFrom> should be a child to <combatSettings> but not enclose the others which is probably going to break everything that uses it now. If the idea is to break everything why not go ahead and change <combatSettings> and <generalSettings> into true <rowset>s and bring it into line with the pseudo standard that many of the APIs original started out with? This will still break everything but you could at least try to spin it as fixing and enhancing stuff and not that someone was clueless how it should be done Just to show what my idea might look like: <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <eveapi version="2"> <currentTime>2009-05-02 20:36:56</currentTime> <result> <rowset name ="generalSettings" key="state" columns="state,stateTimestamp,onlineTimestamp,usageFlags,deployFlags"> <row state="4" stateTimestamp="2009-05-02 21:31:36" onlineTimestamp="2009-04-18 23:30:29" usageFlags="3" deployFlags="0"/> </rowset> <rowset name="combatSettings" key="useStandingFrom" columns="useStandingFrom,allowCorporationMembers, allowAllianceMembers,onStandingsBelow,onStatusGoesBelow, onAggression,onCorporationWar"> <row useStandingFrom="154683985" allowCorporationMembers="1" allowAllianceMembers="1" onStandingsBelow="10" onStatusGoesBelow="0" onAggression="0" onCorporationWar="1"/> </rowset> <rowset name="fuel" key="typeID" columns="typeID,quantity"> <row typeID="16275" quantity="2447" /> <row typeID="16274" quantity="18758" /> <row typeID="9848" quantity="166" /> <row typeID="9832" quantity="332" /> <row typeID="3689" quantity="332" /> <row typeID="44" quantity="166" /> <row typeID="16273" quantity="6142" /> <row typeID="16272" quantity="5644" /> <row typeID="3683" quantity="1162" /> </rowset> </result> <cachedUntil>2009-05-02 21:36:56</cachedUntil> </eveapi> (Sorry about the formating but was in a hurry ) Notice that some of the information have been moved around and renamed but does the same things in clearer ways and is grouped better as well IMHO anyway I'm not sure the "keys" are right but once again was doing this in a bit of a hurry and only spent about 15 minutes thinking on it and editing the XML for above. What I find sad in many ways about all of this is someone like me can spend that little time reading about the changes in the blog and not really even think about it to know the planned changes to add <useStandingFrom> was done incorrectly and that if the API was going to be changed it should be updated in a way that would really enhance it instead of just breaking it for everyone. That's my 0.02 ISKs worth and I hopefully someone at CCP proves many of third party developers wrong when they say no one in CCP ever listens to them and they don't care what we think or really want our feadback when it comes to changes in the APIs. -- Finds camping stations from the inside much easier. Designer of Yapeal for Eve API.
Amida Ta German Mining and Manufacture Corp.	Posted - 2010.05.18 08:23:00 - [40] Just 3 short points: 1) Won't there be any PI Api? At least one for querying which planets you have PI on and how many structures there are (essentially that on the science/production tab). If not, why? 2) I'm with everyone else on the opinion of the contact list. Use a full API key here. 3) Imho the change in outposts is fine as proposed. It's true what Dragonaire wrote that it doesn't follow that completely ugly xml-misuse rowset/row scheme (that never should had been used in the first place). But users are using API libraries exactly for that reason: Shield them from (breaking) changes like that if possible. _________________________ EveAI.Live - The EVE-Online API/class library for .Net, C# and VB.Net
Hel O'Ween Men On A Mission	Posted - 2010.05.18 08:38:00 - [41] Originally by: Dragonaire First let's add my name to the list that thinks the contacts using the limited API key is a bad idea as both a third party developer and a player. Most people don't want to give out their limited key now to outside parties because they feel it allows more access then they like and this is going to make even fewer willing. This! I have the strong suspicion that we 3rd party devs need to gather the next time the CSM is elected and get one of us in there. -- EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager
Vessper Indicium Technologies	Posted - 2010.05.18 10:31:00 - [42] The Contacts API should be the same as the Calendar in that it requires the full API key, not the limited one. EveHQ Character App

CCP Prism X Gallente C C P C C P Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.18 11:46:00 - [43] Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. ~ Prism X EvE Database Developer Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006. Relocating your cozy, secure container to the EVE cemetery since 2008.

darius mclever	Posted - 2010.05.18 12:34:00 - [44] Originally by: CCP Prism X Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. thank you!
Catari Taga Centre Of Attention Rough Necks	Posted - 2010.05.18 13:00:00 - [45] Originally by: CCP Prism X Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. thanks CCP Bella Bee -- Originally by: Zeke Mobius I swear the catholic church was faster at admitting the earth was round than CCP at fixing stuff.
Mjana Switzerland EVE Corp.	Posted - 2010.05.18 13:45:00 - [46] Originally by: CCP Prism X Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. Good news! :)
BeanBagKing Ch3mic4l Warfare	Posted - 2010.05.18 13:53:00 - [47] Originally by: CCP Prism X Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. \o/
Ix Forres Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2010.05.18 14:07:00 - [48] Originally by: CCP Prism X Completely avoiding off topic questions for now. I was going to ask some questions regarding the contact list being on the limited key but I took me longer to type it up than for CCP Bella Bee to convince me of it still being useful on the full access alone. Contacts API will require the full key. Nice to hear the contacts API will be a full key service. Do you or other developers plan to stop avoiding the off topic questions anytime soon?
Lost Hamster Hamster Holding Corp	Posted - 2010.05.18 14:22:00 - [49] Good news, with the FULL API key.
Hel O'Ween Men On A Mission	Posted - 2010.05.19 09:26:00 - [50] Good move on the API for Contacts! -- EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager
Sade Onyx	Posted - 2010.05.19 11:28:00 - [51] For those of us (unless its just me) who dont fully understand: Whats the significance of the contacts being Full API only?
Oreth Te	Posted - 2010.05.19 11:35:00 - [52] Originally by: Vessper The Contacts API should be the same as the Calendar in that it requires the full API key, not the limited one. Hmmm Help on this please, Hi Ves if you get a chance please explain the significance of this statement, I am aware of the API keys and to some extent what they can be used for. Perhaps I am being a bit dense here and really missing the escence of what is being discussed but isn't the Limited API the safer of the two to use in public domains.
Dragonaire Caldari Corax. New Eden Retail Federation	Posted - 2010.05.19 13:29:00 - [53] Limited API key - Lets whom ever has it know about your characters, their skills, your current balances, what skills you have queued, and general info on your corp roles. Full API key - Lets whom ever has it know where everything you own is including how you've got you ships fitted, what you're researching, buying, selling, etc and if you are CEO or director in your corp all that info plus more about the corp. Most people won't want to give away all that info to something outside their direct control but may risk what the limited key does if they believe the benefit out weigh the risk. Would you broadcast you contact list in Jita local or or would you only do that in your corp channel/ private chat with someone you've known for a while in Eve that what's it all about. -- Finds camping stations from the inside much easier. Designer of Yapeal for Eve API.
Vessper Indicium Technologies	Posted - 2010.05.19 14:02:00 - [54] Originally by: Oreth Te Originally by: Vessper The Contacts API should be the same as the Calendar in that it requires the full API key, not the limited one. Hmmm Help on this please, Hi Ves if you get a chance please explain the significance of this statement, I am aware of the API keys and to some extent what they can be used for. Perhaps I am being a bit dense here and really missing the escence of what is being discussed but isn't the Limited API the safer of the two to use in public domains. Think of it in terms of the amount of information it discloses. Limited API = limited information, Full API = full information. What information is provided by each key is summarised in the post above but for a more complete picture, have a look at this web page. EveHQ Character App
Orgell Evaan Minmatar Tax Avoidance Through Alliterative Syndication	Posted - 2010.05.19 16:12:00 - [55] Originally by: Sade Onyx For those of us (unless its just me) who dont fully understand: Whats the significance of the contacts being Full API only? Limiting access. Limited access is for showing off skillsets, not handing out all your (and your corp's) info.
Smartacus The Arrow Project	Posted - 2010.05.20 11:27:00 - [56] Please give us the option to link POS assets (guns/silos/harvesters etc) to the actual towers. So we can pull pos's including their whole setup from the API.
Amida Ta German Mining and Manufacture Corp.	Posted - 2010.05.20 12:30:00 - [57] Could we please get an answer on PI APIs? _________________________ EveAI.Live - The EVE-Online API/class library for .Net, C# and VB.Net
FURNAR	Posted - 2010.05.21 07:28:00 - [58] BE NICE IF SISI WORKED , 3 HRS AND GOT INCOMPATIABLE VERSON
Wollari The Executives IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.21 22:04:00 - [59] <sarcasm>Thank you for the nice dev response so far on the not-answered questions</sarcasm> o/
Haskell Gallente	Posted - 2010.05.22 23:57:00 - [60] Edited by: Haskell on 22/05/2010 23:59:17 Originally by: Wollari <sarcasm>Thank you for the nice dev response so far on the not-answered questions</sarcasm> It looks like the API is more like a necessary evil than a desired feature from the viewpoint of CCP. They probably just keep maintaining it because if they'd disable it, it would upset a lot of players. And because they don't want tools to scrαpe EVE Gate (which, interestingly, was announced to eventually support all features of the EVE client except undocking, while the API was indicated to never support write operations). IMO it's a good thing they do maintain it, even if reluctantly, given that their general corporate motto seems to be "once a feature is released, abandon it immediately". However, if I could send a message to CCP, it would be this: Linkage -- think about it when allocating resources next.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.