[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp][interfaces] Portlet instance handles
IMHO, the relationship or binding between the consumer and producer should be through the single handle which is established at registration time between the consumer and producer. that handle if it is determine that the producer maintaines statefull information should be associated by the consumer with the currently running user/page/portlet instance. I potentially am not following the thread, but the inclusion of another key seems to increase the complexity from both sides, but I am more than willing to hear others blast my confusion. jeff -----Original Message----- From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 9:10 AM To: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [wsrp][interfaces] Portlet instance handles In addition to Alan's comments, I would note that the handle we have been discussing is an opaque remote reference to a runtime entity capturing the (transient) state of the interaction of a particular "session" with a particular Consumer. How a Consumer maps these to End-Users is an orthogonal issue, though establishing a one-to-one coorespondance is the most straight forward solution. More recent discussions are beginning to think about how these might map into a set of persistent data the Producer has stored for the Consumer to reference when initiating "sessions". I would like these to use a different name (suggestion = key) in order to reduce confusion when discussing the difference with handles in both syntactic and semantic use. Mike, using these words, your suggestion maps into there being a key (has persistent data about the relationship between the portal and portlet) the portal uses in combination with data from a user profile when establishing a session for an End-User. The portlet would produce/return a handle used to reference that session's state. Alan Kropp <akropp@epicentri To: "'Michael Freedman'" <Michael.Freedman@oracle.com>, c.com> WSRP <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org> cc: 05/09/2002 06:02 Subject: RE: [wsrp][interfaces] Portlet instance handles PM Agree with Mike here..from the WSIA side, we've been talking about the handle as a reference constructed expressly for, and for the exclusive use of a given Consumer. To the extent that the service (portlet provider) needs visibility as to 'who' the End User really is, this should be information that's passed along with the request the Consumer constructs on behalf of the End User, within the bounds of the trust relationship in effect between Consumer and Producer. Alan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Freedman [mailto:Michael.Freedman@oracle.com] Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 2:47 PM To: WSRP Subject: [wsrp][interfaces] Portlet instance handles Folks, In a number of subcommittees I believe it has been expressed/assumed that: a) Portlet instances have unique persistent ids/handles that will be retained both by the portal and the portlet service. b) A portlet instance (handle) corresponds to a given user of a given portlet on a portal page. c) This handle will be generated by the portlet service. I have been surprised by (b) being part of the assumption and would like to understand better why folks feel this the right way to model things. I am surprised because it seems to require the portal maintain N instance references per portlet on a page where N corresponds to the number of users (who have visited this page). Representing a database company I guess I should be happy that we want this data bloat ;-) Seriously, however, I would like to understand why we think its proper/necessary to manage this persistent id when a more lightweight mechanism exists -- namely one persistent id that represents the portlet instance on the page + the current user identity. Basically, it seems the downside of the assumed/proposed approach are large(r) data sets being maintained in the portal that likely makes export operations, upgrades, etc. more expensive. In addition it requires the portal to runtime map from an obvious key (the page's portlet instance and the user id) to this handle. On the surface it seems that portlets need an id that represents a portal's portlet page instance on a per user basis as a key to that user's personalization data for that portlet instance. Are there other needs for this key? If not why do we need to generate such an id if there is no personalization data or if the personalization is being managed by the portlet itself (in this case the portlet can choose to generate its own id and managed the mapping itself)? And even if the portal is maintaining the personalization data why can't it choose the key itself? -Mike- ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC