wsrp message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp] Ajax proposal uploaded
- From: Rich Thompson <richt2@us.ibm.com>
- To: OASIS WSRP TC <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:42:45 -0400
I had a chance (i.e. time in a waiting
room) to go through this at a finer granularity. Here are my comments:
1. Each of the examples should use a
try clause such that they get an XMLHttpRequest interface regardless of
whether XMLPortletRequest is supported or not. (i.e. are better examples
of relevant js code for portlet developers).
2. There are a number of comments about
keeping this close but not quite semantically equivalent to the XMLHttpRequest
definition underway at w3c. Other than the actually response being filtered
to remove items targeted at the framework, exactly what deviations are
expected? What is the rationale behind each of them?
3. A relatively minor point, but "ID"
is too generic. I would suggest "requestID".
4. In section 2.2 (and elsewhere) you
explicitly describe updating a fragment of the portlet's markup. While
this could generically mean the view defining markup, some data fragments
or some controller scripts, it would be good to be explicit somewhere early
in the writeup that "portlet markup" includes any/all of these.
5. In section 2.3 you explicitly require
the framework to block further input in the browser. Since this completely
negates the value/reason for using asynchronous communications, why is
it being required? I understand there may be server-side technologies where
the component technology requires such single threading (for example, I
think JSR 168 portlets would require this), however, I don't see a reason
this is projected out to the entire page nor why it would apply when the
component technology doesn't require it.
6. I would want to discuss further the
names we apply to these interfaces as I think including the word "Portlet"
in it makes it too specific. This might fall out naturally of a discussion
about the broader area of component artifacts interacting with framework
artifacts, but I would assert that a term which is more UA oriented would
be better.
Rich
Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>
09/21/2006 12:03 PM
|
To
| OASIS WSRP TC <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [wsrp] Ajax proposal uploaded |
|
I upload a JSR286-version of the Ajax proposal this
morning. It is
located at
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-interfaces/download.php/20397/xpr-wd-03.html
For some reason, this upload did not generate an email to the group.
This document proposes two script interfaces XMLPortletPortlet and
XHLHttpRequestFactory.
There are a few examples of these interfaces at
http://wsrp.bea.com:7001/ajax.
Subbu
>>Register now for BEA World 2006 --- See http://www.bea.com/beaworld<<
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]