Style 2000 Services

[Carri Seargent]

REST (representational state transfer) is a software architectural style that was created to guide the design and development of the architecture for the World Wide Web. REST defines a set of constraints for how the architecture of a distributed, Internet-scale hypermedia system, such as the Web, should behave. The REST architectural style emphasises uniform interfaces, independent deployment of components, the scalability of interactions between them, and creating a layered architecture to promote caching to reduce user-perceived latency, enforce security, and encapsulate legacy systems.[1]

The term representational state transfer was introduced and defined in 2000 by computer scientist Roy Fielding in his doctoral dissertation. It means that a server will respond with the representation of a resource (today, it will most often be an HTML, XML or JSON document) and that resource will contain hypermedia links that can be followed to make the state of the system change. Any such request will in turn receive the representation of a resource, and so on.

An important consequence is that the only identifier that needs to be known is the identifier of the first resource requested, and all other identifiers will be discovered. This means that those identifiers can change without the need to inform the client beforehand and that there can be only loose coupling between client and server.

By their nature, architectural styles are independent of any specific implementation, and while REST was created as part of the development of the Web standards, the implementation of the Web does not obey every constraint in the REST architectural style. Mismatches can occur due to ignorance or oversight, but the existence of the REST architectural style means that they can be identified before they become standardised. For example, Fielding identified the embedding of session information in URIs as a violation of the constraints of REST which can negatively affect shared caching and server scalability. HTTP cookies also violated REST constraints because they can become out of sync with the browser's application state, making them unreliable; they also contain opaque data that can be a concern for privacy and security.

The REST architectural style is designed for network-based applications, specifically client-server applications. But more than that, it is designed for Internet-scale usage, so the coupling between the user agent (client) and the origin server must be as loose as possible to facilitate large-scale adoption.

The strong decoupling of client and server together with the text-based transfer of information using a uniform addressing protocol provided the basis for meeting the requirements of the Web: extensibility, anarchic scalability and independent deployment of components, large-grain data transfer, and a low entry-barrier for content readers, content authors and developers alike.

The REST architectural style defines six guiding constraints.[6][8] When these constraints are applied to the system architecture, it gains desirable non-functional properties, such as performance, scalability, simplicity, modifiability, visibility, portability, and reliability.[1]

The uniform interface constraint is fundamental to the design of any RESTful system.[1] It simplifies and decouples the architecture, which enables each part to evolve independently. The four constraints for this uniform interface are:

As a seasoned BI developer I am used to producing reports using many different tools, and have been a delighted user of Reporting Services for several years now. However, I must admit that I am not a design guru, and that I prefer spending my time on the queries and code rather than the presentation of the reports that I produce. So I inevitably find it both frustrating and pointlessly time-consuming when I am asked to reformat a report for the umpteenth time, as the new boss (or new analyst or helpful staff member) suggests a complete makeover of the reports that I have just worked half the night to produce to an already tight deadline.

After some time reflecting on this question, I came up with a style-based approach that I hope will give other developers the tools to help them increase their productivity, while avoiding repetitive and laborious report refactoring. The techniques described in these three articles apply equally well to SQL Server 2005 as to SQL Server 2008.

Let's be clear about this. It is impossible to duplicate in Reporting Services the functionality of ASP.Net themes or even Cascading Style Sheets. So what we are looking at is a simple and efficient way of changing the colour of cells, text and lines, as well as changing the thickness and type of borders instantly and globally for one or more reports, using a tagged, or named style approach.

Assuming, then, that the effort of defining styles is worth the investment, let's begin with basic definitions. Firstly. by "Styles" I mean a synonym for a specific report attribute like colour or line weight; by "Stylesheet" I mean an organised collection of styles and their definitions.

I will presume that the reader has basic knowledge of Reporting Services, and can create and format reports. Indeed, this article will not explain how to create reports, as the techniques described can be applied to any report.

Of course, once you have a tried and tested style sheet in custom code, the code can be copied to all the reports you wish to standardize. This will ensure that the same colour scheme is applied to all the reports you format in this way.

So now you know how to gain time and also standardise report presentation when developing Reporting Services reports using custom code stylesheets. The next article will explain how to extend the stylesheet paradigm to centralised style definitions using Custom Assemblies and interactive style definitions stored in SQL Server tables.

Getting started with SQL Server 2005 Reporting Services or the new report controls in Visual Studio 2005? Brian Welcker demonstrates some tips and tricks that you can use to add interactive features to your own reports.

SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services is one of the most exciting new enhancements to SQL Server in quite some time. The addition of a robust and flexible reporting environment is something that most DBAs and developers are pleased to see. New author Andy Leonard brings us a technique for scheduling the execution of a report asynchronously, so your application or system can get back to work while the report is being generated.

SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services is becoming a more and more popular reporting option everyday. However, the disaster recovery plan for this add on is not a simple backup and restore since there are multiple pieces and servers usually involved. However the DBA may be responsible for the entire system. Mike Pearson brings us a look at some of the scenarios that you need to consider and what you might need to prepare for disaster recovery of SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services.

In this article, I will show you how to leverage the Reporting Services unique extensible architecture to supercharge your report capabilities. First, I will explain how embedded and custom code options work. Next, I will show you how you can leverage custom code to author an advanced report with sales forecasting features.

The Russell US Indexes, from mega cap to microcap, serve as leading benchmarks for institutional investors. The modular index construction allows investors to track current and historical market performance by specific market segment (large/mid/small/microcap) or investment style (growth/value/defensive/dynamic). All sub-indexes roll up to the Russell 3000 Index.

Combining the Russell 3000 Index with the Russell Microcap Index, the Russell 3000E Index provides the broadest coverage of investable US equities, which includes up to the 4,000 largest US stocks by total market capitalization as of the reconstitution rank date. The Russell US Indexes can be used as performance benchmarks, or as the basis for index-linked products including index tracking funds, derivatives and Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs).

The Russell US ESG Indexes are a broad-based, alternatively-weighted US equity index family based on the Russell US Indexes. The indexes are designed to measure the performance of megacap to microcap securities that meet an improved index-level ESG profile, while maintaining similar risk/return characteristics to the underlying universe.

The Russell 1000 Index measures the performance of the large-cap segment of the US equity universe. It includes approximately 1,000 largest US stocks, representing 93% of investable US equities by market capitalization.

Inclusion in the Russell 1000 Index is driven by a rigorous, rules-based methodology. The index provides a complete, unbiased measure of US large-cap performance, with no gaps and no overlaps when used in conjunction with the small-cap Russell 2000.

The Russell 3000 Index measures the performance of 3,000 stocks and includes all large-cap, mid-cap and small-cap US equities, along with some microcap stocks. The index is designed to represent approximately 98% of investable US equities by market capitalization.

Investors seeking to capture a strategy reflecting broad US equities performance can confidently choose the Russell 3000 knowing there are no subjective inclusions or exclusions of stocks. Like all Russell Indexes, the Russell 3000 is fully reconstituted once a year to ensure accurate reflection of the targeted market segment.

For more information on how LSEG uses your data, see our Privacy Statement. You can adjust your preferences at any time through the preference link in any electronic communication that you receive from us.

The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.

3a8082e126