[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use cases for issue #44 (set new public params)
My point being that these all naturally impact multiple requests as well
as well as multiple portlets. Unless we explicitly define a stateless
one-shot user interface were portlets revert to unspecified public
parameters after a user interaction renders the UI.
Regards,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Hepper [mailto:sthepper@hursley.ibm.com]
Sent: 26 July 2005 13:46
To: Andre Kramer
Cc: Rich Thompson; wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use cases for issue
#44 (set new public params)
Examples are:
- entering a zip code to display the weather, tourist information,
cheapest flights
- search queries
- customer id to display previous order, address, current order, etc. by
different portlets
In summary all use case where you currently store the information as
navigational state, but where it would be beneficial for other portlets
to also be able to access this navigational state parameter to modify
their view accordingly.
Stefan
Andre Kramer wrote:
> Could Stefan & Richard please remind us as to when it is useful to
have
> a render URL affect other portlets on a page (just) for the duration
of
> one page fetch, when a subsequent refresh (browser button) is likely
to
> revert to the previous consumer state (as nothing permanent is being
> implied spanning consumer/portlets)?
>
>
>
> I suspect any useful coordination state change seems more related to a
> consumer effectively tracking and forwarding shared values and so the
> Web request to the consumer should itself be a POST to the
> consumer/Portal? Given PPs on render URLs that don't last v.s. PPs in
> action replies that do (SHOULD/MUST) aren't developers going to choose
> actions anyway, e.g. updating a charting page's units from imperial to
> metric?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Andre
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
> *Sent:* 25 July 2005 15:02
> *To:* wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org
> *Subject:* Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use cases for
> issue #44 (set new public params)
>
>
>
>
> I think it might be time to pull this discussion back out of the
> abstract space and relook at the use cases we have accepted as
compelling.
>
> Stefan & Richard have posted some use cases that clearly would benefit
> from PPs being settable on URLs and need a PP scope of at least the
user
> interaction ... including all portlets accessed during the processing
of
> the user interaction. Could you post use cases requiring broader
scopes?
> I presume that if we find them compelling, my answer to Mike's
previous
> inquiry about requiring Consumers to support PPs may need to change.
>
> Rich
>
> *Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>*
>
> 07/25/05 09:06 AM
>
>
>
> To
>
>
>
> wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org
>
> cc
>
>
>
>
>
> Subject
>
>
>
> Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use cases for issue #44
(set
> new public params)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Stefan,
>
> This is question of scoping.
>
> As we have been debating, there are two options to let portlets update
> some shared state (public params). The first option is to let portlets
> encode such change in URLs, and the second is to let producers return
> new public params within SOAP.
>
> Apart from the encoding rules, these options influence scoping of this
> shared state that consumers can implement. If you go with the first
> option, consumers will have to limit this shared state to a user's
> session or just a few portlets on a given page. IMO, this is
restrictive.
>
> However, if you go with the second option, consumer has more choice.
> Consumers can implement wider scoping of this shared state.
>
> Subbu
>
>
> Stefan Hepper wrote:
>> I think this is mixing sematics. Anything that requires a pbia is
ment
>> to be a resource state change. For resource changes you need a
blocking
>> semantic. Navigational state and public params in my mind define the
>> view state of the portlet and changing this state does not require a
>> pbia nor a non-blocking action. The new parameters or state can just
be
>> provided to the portlet.
>>
>> This also relates to the W3C standard about GET and POST:
>>
>> " * Use GET if:
>> o The interaction is more like a question (i.e., it is a
safe
>> operation such as a query, read operation, or lookup).
>> * Use POST if:
>> o The interaction is more like an order, or
>> o The interaction changes the state of the resource in a
way
>> that the user would perceive (e.g., a subscription to a service), or
>> o The user be held accountable for the results of the
>> interaction."
>>
>> I don't see why it is necessary to pay the penalty of an action for
>> changing PPs.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>> Subbu Allamaraju wrote:
>> > Rich Thompson wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> My comment was that requiring action processing is always
possible,
>> >> but why would we require it in this case and not for
>> >> mode/windowState/navState changes?
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree, but the difference is the encoding rules.
>> >
>> > Subbu
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Rich
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> *Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>*
>> >>
>> >> 07/22/05 09:48 AM
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> To
>> >> wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org
>> >> cc
>> >>
>> >> Subject
>> >> Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use cases for
issue
>> >> #44 (set new public params)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thinking aloud, can't we map render URL use cases to use pbia?
The
>> >> reason for changing the value of a paramter could be the result
of a
>> >> user interaction, which can then compute new values and return
with
>> pbia
>> >> response.
>> >>
>> >> Subbu
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Rich Thompson wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > It is possible to drive every style of update through action
>> >> processing,
>> >> > but I think that short changes the advantages of using render
URLs
>> >> where
>> >> > they are appropriate.
>> >> >
>> >> > New navState can be specified on each URL (including render
>> URLs), why
>> >> > should not the Portlet be able to specify the shared version
(PPs)?
>> >> >
>> >> > Rich
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > *"Andre Kramer" <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com>*
>> >> >
>> >> > 07/22/05 08:02 AM
>> >> >
>> >> > > To
>> >> > Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS,
>> >> <wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> >> > cc
>> >> > > Subject
>> >> > RE: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional
use
>> >> cases for issue #44
>> >> > (set new public params)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > After reading your previous email, I was driving towards a
similar
>> >> > recommendation for Portlets to "re-fresh" public parameters
by
>> >> return on
>> >> > each WSRP interaction so that a consumer is more likely to
forward
>> >> > values that have been recently actively returned and I agree
this
>> >> means
>> >> > Portlets have to maintain/store public param values e.g. in
>> >> navigational
>> >> > state. But, with such advice, I see no reason to have public
>> >> parameters
>> >> > to visibly appear on URLs (rewrite expressions or templates)
at
>> >> all. Why
>> >> > introduce a new encoding and (in markup) transport mechanism
> when it
>> >> > seems a preferable Web Service (in SOAP response) encoding
and
>> >> transport
>> >> > is already available and recommended?
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> > Andre
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >
>> >> > *From:* Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] *
>> >> > Sent:* 22 July 2005 12:24*
>> >> > To:* wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org*
>> >> > Subject:* Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use
cases for
>> >> > issue #44 (set new public params)
>> >> > >
>> >> > The Interfaces SC discussion raised the question about the
scope of
>> >> PPs
>> >> > set in this manner. Namely; does the Portlet need to keep
>> >> specifying the
>> >> > PPs on all subsequent requests or can it depend on the
Consumer to
>> >> > resupply those values in the future (i.e. some scope, like
>> >> user-session,
>> >> > becomes mandated).
>> >> >
>> >> > I think we should be careful to leave scoping questions up to
the
>> >> > Consumer, but if PPs are to function as a coordination model,
>> then we
>> >> > also have to discourage Portlets from setting all PPs on
every
>> URL. A
>> >> > model where Portlets are encouraged to store current PP
values
>> >> > (preferably in navState) for use as default values should the
>> Consumer
>> >> > not supply a value on a subsequent invocation and only do PP
> setting
>> >> > when a value needs to change accomplishes this. It removes
>> setting the
>> >> > value each time such that coordination happens in a more
reasonable
>> >> > manner while also providing for reasonable user experience,
even
>> when
>> >> > the Consumer does not support and PP scope beyond the user
>> >> interaction.
>> >> >
>> >> > Note: We could consider a model where Portlets MUST encode
all
>> PPs on
>> >> > all URLs such that this supplies the scope, rather than the
> Consumer
>> >> > determining the scope, but that this fails as the Portlet
might not
>> >> have
>> >> > access to all PPs (security and privacy reasons).
>> >> >
>> >> > Rich
>> >> >
>> >> > *Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS*
>> >> >
>> >> > 07/07/05 11:54 AM
>> >> >
>> >> > > To
>> >> > wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.org
>> >> > cc
>> >> > > Subject
>> >> > [wsrp-interfaces] Fw: [wsrp] Additional use
cases
>> >> for issue #44 (set
>> >> > new public params)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Reposting, as requested ...
>> >> > ----- Forwarded by Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM on 07/07/05 11:52
AM
>> -----
>> >> >
>> >> > *Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS*
>> >> >
>> >> > 06/15/05 09:24 AM
>> >> >
>> >> > > To: WSRP TC
>> >> <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> >> > cc: > Subject: Re: [wsrp]
Additional use
>> >> cases for issue #44 (set
>> >> > new public params)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I had taken a to-do from the Interfaces SC to develop (in
>> conjunction
>> >> > with Stefan, Richard and Mike) a proposal for this portion of
Issue
>> >> #44.
>> >> > Here is that proposal: *_
>> >> >
>> >> > Philosophy:_* Since Public Parameters (PP) are another aspect
of
>> >> > Consumer managed state that is exposed to Portlets (the other
two
>> are
>> >> > modes and windowState), Portlets should be able to request
>> changes to
>> >> > PPs in much the same way as they do modes and windowStates
(on URLs
>> >> and
>> >> > in responses from pbia and handleEvents). *_
>> >> >
>> >> > On URLs: (2 issues)_*
>> >> > 1. Need to encode 3 pieces of information (request to set a
PP, the
>> >> > PPname and the PPvalue) into 2 places (name=value) when using
a
>> >> > querystring and deal with the reduced set of characters
allowed
>> in the
>> >> > path portion ('=' is not allowed). Templates also introduce
an
> issue
>> >> > with how to encode multiple PPs ... preferably with the
Template
>> only
>> >> > having a single placeholder.
>> >> > -Proposal:
>> >> > 1. All public parameters specified on a URL are concatenated
in the
>> >> form
>> >> > of "PPname1=PPvalue1&PPname2=PPvalue2".
>> >> > 2. The resulting string is URL encoded (changes '=' into %3D
> and '&'
>> >> > into %26) to make it valid in both the querystring and path
>> >> portions of
>> >> > a URL.
>> >> > 3. This URL encoded string becomes the value for the
>> >> > wsrp-publicParameter URL parameter, regardless of whether
template
>> >> > processing or Consumer URL rewriting is in use.
>> >> >
>> >> > 2. How to encode complex PPvalues? I suggest serializing the
>> >> PPvalue to
>> >> > XML and URL encoding this XML. The Consumer would then
receive
>> the PP,
>> >> > recognize it is of a complex type (based on PPname) and
decode the
>> >> > PPvalue to get the XML. *_
>> >> >
>> >> > On Operation responses:_*
>> >> > 1. Return PP requests via a field much as newMode and
> newWindowState
>> >> > request updates to those aspects of Consumer managed state.
Suggest
>> >> this
>> >> > field be of type QNamedStringArray, though it could be an
array of
>> >> > NamedString if we do not want to introduce a usage of a type
from
>> the
>> >> > 'extra' namespace.
>> >> >
>> >> > Rich
>> >> >
>> >> > *Michael Freedman <michael.freedman@oracle.com>*
>> >> >
>> >> > 05/24/05 07:55 PM
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > To
>> >> > WSRP TC <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> >> > cc
>> >> > > Subject
>> >> > Re: [wsrp] Additional use cases for issue
#44 (set
>> >> new public params)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I too am interested in hearing people's current opinions.
Our
> early
>> >> > coordination discussions considered this carefully. It was
>> decided at
>> >> > that time to not support two coordination models that
delivered
>> >> > equivalent function. Though I pushed strongly for such a
parameter
>> >> > style mechanism, the subcomittee preferred Events because it
not
>> only
>> >> > allowed state to be transferred but also actions. The
current
>> public
>> >> > parameter model was introduced by me later and was crafted
>> >> specifically
>> >> > to not step on the the toes of Events. >
>> >> > To extend this conversation I would like to pose:
>> >> > 1. We consider whether publicParameters should be
QNames so
>> >> they
>> >> > can be shared/reused across producers. Note: this is likely
needed
>> >> > whether we stick with events or add the ability to encode a
public
>> >> > parameter directly in the URL.
>> >> > 2. We consider adding a new "defined event" called
>> >> > publicParameterValueChanged. The payload of this event would
> be the
>> >> > QName of the parameter and an Object any holding the parmeter
value
>> >> > [though it might be nice to support our Any/String optional
pair
>> style
>> >> > here].
>> >> > 3. We consider defining the meaning of publicParameter
whose
>> >> > capability contains the value "required" as meaning that
normal
>> >> usage of
>> >> > this portlet requires the consumer to provide this value.
The
>> portlet
>> >> > would still have to deal with situations in which this wasn't
>> provided
>> >> > but likely an end-user would consider this usage
>> crufty/abnormal. For
>> >> > example if a portlet required a CustID parameter and didn't
receive
>> >> one
>> >> > it could display a view that asks for a custID. The key here
by
>> >> saying
>> >> > "required" [we can choose a different capability name] the
consumer
>> >> can
>> >> > distinguish between those public parameters that have a
secondary
>> >> impact
>> >> > on the portlet [optional] and those that have a primary or
> important
>> >> > impact [required].
>> >> > -Mike-
>> >> >
>> >> > Stefan Hepper wrote:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> > I've some use cases that may be a good match for the ability
to set
>> >> new
>> >> > public parameters by the producer and to encode public
> parameters in
>> >> > URls by the producer.
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. displaying content based on a specific product id:
>> >> > - Portlet A allows to select a product from a list
>> >> > - User clicks on a specific product
>> >> > - Portlet B renders details of this product
>> >> > - Portlet C renders currently available number of items on
> stock for
>> >> > this product
>> >> > - user wants to bookmark this result in order to come back to
>> product
>> >> > tomorrow
>> >> >
>> >> > implementation with events:
>> >> > Portlet A encodes the customer selection URLs as POST action
links
>> >> > Portlet A receives a performBlockingInteraction call
>> >> > Portlet A returns event productID=10
>> >> > Portlet B receive a blocking handleEvents call for
productID=10 and
>> >> > returns new navigational state
>> >> > Portlet C receive a blocking handleEvents call for
productID=10 and
>> >> > returns new navigational state
>> >> >
>> >> > implementation with public params:
>> >> > Portlet A encodes the product selection URLs as GET render
links
>> with
>> >> > the productID as public param
>> >> > Portlet A receives a render call with the public param
productID=10
>> >> > Portlet B receives a render call with the public param
productID=10
>> >> > Portlet C receives a render call with the public param
productID=10
>> >> >
>> >> > which would be much more efficient and also consistent with
the W3C
>> >> > architecture as links that do only change view state should
be
>> encoded
>> >> > as GET links.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 2. display content based on a specific customer id
>> >> >
>> >> > 3. display content based on the selected state of a map
>> >> > portlet A displays a map of USA
>> >> > portlet B displays information on the selected state (#
people
>> >> > registered, capital, ...)
>> >> > portlet C displays all IBM labs in that state
>> >> >
>> >> > and many more.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > This would allow to have some gobal navigational state that
can
>> be set
>> >> > via URLs by portlets. Also portlets may want to set new
public
>> >> params as
>> >> > a result of an blocking interaction or a handle event call.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > What do you think?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Stefan
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS
TC
> that
>> >> > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all
your
>> TCs in
>> >> > OASIS
>> >> > at: _
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
__https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
_
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To
>> >> > unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
that
>> >> > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all
your
>> TCs in
>> >> > OASIS at:
>> >> >
>>
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]