Open Data Protocol

CAPM is what SAP uses for that outer layer.

A domain model first, convention over configuration approach which compiles core data services, CDs, models into OData services, with persistence, authorization and multi-gnancy mainly handled by generated code, too.

The problem is simple.

Move the logic to BTP is a slogan, not an architecture.

The RESTful ABAP programming model, RAP, is the clean core compatible way to expose logic that must stay in ABAP, which we build on CD's views and which generates O data services with transactional, draft, lock, validation, handling, 5, 9.

In the world of side-by-side half we have CAPM which is the model-driven framework.

A CAPM project puts forth entities and services in CDs, the framework in turn puts out an OData v4 service with default persistence and generic CRUD handlers which also has init hooks for custom logic in Node.js or Java .

Also it is typical for CAPM apps to run on Cloud Foundry or Kyma, which in turn is backed by SAP HANA Cloud, and we also see Fiori Elements UIs generated from the same CD's annotations.

But yeah, he was and he's still on this frontier.

So But yeah, I thought if I want to run something locally and have this develop, change, activate, run, and see what is coming at the other end, slightly faster and less heavy weight, may I just reuse his tool? And yes, if possible, but then, well, my scenario was to use something like on top of OData and it's immediately kind of bring some other stuff, but yeah, OData is actually an open source, not open source, but it's open standard.

So there is a lot of independent implementations of that.

So just plug it in and then another part and eventually become OpenStringKit, which is like, actually Claude has gave it naming because it was like vibing steampunk we want to keep steam but it's open okay let's let's

It's this foundational layer or something like that, right? Which is good if you want to develop.

Obviously, you don't have access to all the bar piece that are there.

But for ABAP development, for creating an OData service or something like that, that's a cool start.

Yeah, I would say that for me, it was a completely pragmatic thing.

We have to go back to the governance and write capability questions in the decision framework instead of asking them once.

Executive Summary How do we approach the design of O data for use in Fiori apps, BTP-hosted extensions, and third-party integrations? We often see that presenting OData ASA one size fits all solution results in services that either do too much for simple read functions or not enough to support business transaction logic.

This article presents a decision framework that puts forward three strategies, CDS view-based exposure, custom RESTful ABAP programming, RAP, services, and SAP API Business Hub published APIs, and ties the choice of strategy to data volatility, consumer type, and governance requirements.

Also, we look at the issues of security, performance, and operation that present themselves once the service crosses the on-premises, cloud boundary, and we end with what we learned from putting these services into live hybrid environments.

Introduction.

Most SAP environments are a mix of on-premises and cloud, with an S4 HANA core on-premises that is extended by BTP-hosted apps, Fiori launchpads, and non-SAP integrations, and in almost all cases the consumer is reaching the core via OData service.

Exposing it as OData is out to be a single decision, which in fact is three separate decisions in the same protocol.

We have a CDs view for OData, a custom RAP-based business object, and an API published through API Business Hub, which err for different purposes and fail in different ways under load.

There's some difficulties with it, like you and I know, because it's like committing records and some other things that doing it with a web viewer where you're not directly like in WebDirect, for example, you're getting advantage of WebDirect for all of the record locking and all the other features, which is great.

When you take that a step back to... to doing all your layout work entirely in a web viewer and now you're committing all your records with different steps, right? You're using OData data API to read and write the data.

So I think what we might be ready for is having a lot of layouts that are entirely web viewer for reading the data and organizing it and getting the colors and everything because it's much more powerful in a web viewer.

And then when a user clicks an action, it brings up a FileMaker card window or something like that.

The first is the easiest to picture.

Business Central exposes its data through web services, and those services come in two flavors, REST APIs and OData.

An API is a doorway that lets another program ask Business Central for specific data.

OData is a related standard that hands that data back in a shape tools like Power BI and Excel already understand.

Pulling data through an API works well when the scope is small.

You ask for the customers you need or the invoices from last quarter, and you leave the rest of the database alone.

But it's nice that we've got these kind of materialized GI results.

This is interesting because you could start building specific I don't know if they're doing it as a single database that's connected to your main instance, but you could start pushing aside data and have it live there and then start running queries on it and connect it to Power BI, do other OData connections and stuff like that.

It's an interesting concept.

I haven't really given this much thought in terms of what it could do, what the use case is exactly.

If you're calling scripts in FileMaker, the on-window transaction will fire.

But if the web application is just making direct OData or data API calls.

Actually, I don't know about data

API.

I

know for sure that currently I filed that as a bug with FileMaker.

If you make a direct OData modification call, it won't fire an on-window transaction.

So there are some side ways around it, but I think that FileMaker has decided to do that for performance reasons.

But weirdly, a lot of the stuff I do actually does not use MCP.

It's, like, direct OData.

For sure.

Which MCP relies on that, but it has all this other stuff too that comes along.

I mean, first with the foundation, shit in, shit out.

And the foundation might be to help the customer go from the GUI to Fiori Elements, which means all of a sudden you have all these OData services underneath, which are, I would say, a foundation or potential foundation for the AI integration.

So the partner can take the customers on this journey.

And actually, what I also liked about this customer session from Björn was that Sebastian Werner, and he's, now I'm not 100% sure anymore, cross-product UX, product management or something like that.