OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp-interfaces message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [wsrp-interfaces] interactionFieldPrefix and namespacing form params

well that's the implication, right.
But how can portlets obtain it?
The APIs need to be changed, i.e. the portlet needs to have a) getNamespace
for the current NS b) getEncodedNS() for the used one to find the params.
Besides the fact that the current APIs don't have that means today, it
seems a strange programming model for me and developers won't understand
I think it would be way easier for them to just habe getNamespace() and
rely on it.

Why wouldn't the "opaque encoding in interaction state not work in
interection state"???
It's mandatory in the spec that it has to flow back. So where exactly is
the problem?

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,

        Richard Jacob
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
WSRP Team Lead & Technical Lead
WSRP Standardization
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469  -  Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com

             Michael Freedman                                              
             @oracle.com>                                               To 
             09/06/2005 07:59                                           cc 
             PM                        wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open.or 
                                       Re: [wsrp-interfaces]               
                                       interactionFieldPrefix and          
                                       namespacing form params             

Why wouldn't the namespacePrefix be passed back to the producer as a field
[encodedNamespacePrefix?] of InteractionParams and/or ResourceParams?
Isn't all we are trying to do here is to formalize encoding this prefix in
interaction state so developers don't have to figure out they need to use
interaction state and we overcome the limitations that such opaque encoding
in interaction state may not work in all situations nore that we have a
corresponding facility in ResourceParams?

Rich Thompson wrote:

      I had also had concerns as I contemplated the tentative solution over
      the weekend.

      If we add a portlet URL parameter to carry the namespacePrefix used
      during markup generation, how does the portlet receive this back?
       - one option would be to add another field to RuntimeContext
      carrying the previousNamespacePrefix, but this raises both complexity
      and a question about why this would be distinct from the current
       - another option would be to increase the lifetime of the
      namespacePrefix to this particular usage of the Portlet by the
      Consumer. This would remove the need to store the prefix in the URL
      as the portlet would also receive back the value used during the
      encoding. The downside is that the Consumer would either need to
      persist this value or have a dependable means of constructing its

      In regards to mandating that wsrp_rewrite_ not be used when encoding
      items that could flow back on interactions, this causes problems with
      using static script that references html form fields by name. One
      could argue that such script requires a rework already in order to
      have the wsrp_rewrite_ inserted and that this rework could instead
      have the prefix supplied to the script on each invocation. In the
      interest of reducing complexity for the portlet (script) developer, I
      would instead argue for requiring that Consumer rewriting use the
      same value as is supplied to the Portlet with namespacePrefix. This
      also allows a broader use case of mixing dynamic (uses
      namespacePrefix) and static (uses wsrp_rewrite_) content.

      Are there edge use cases that wouldn't be solved by this pair of
      1. Increase the lifetime of the namespacePrefix to the particular
      usage of the Portlet by the Consumer.
      2. Require that Consumer namespace rewriting use the same value as
      what is supplied to the Producer in namespacePrefix

      I also think there is value to making namespacePrefix and
      portletInstanceKey required fields (Producer can depend on them) and
      am unaware of any use cases where the Consumer would have a difficult
      time supplying these values. In general this would be a case of v2
      raising the bar of what constitutes a good Consumer implementation.


 Richard Jacob                                                             
 09/06/05 05:51 AM                        wsrp-interfaces@lists.oasis-open 
                                          Re: [wsrp-interfaces]            
                                          interactionFieldPrefix and       
                                          namespacing form params          

      Here goes the proposal I had, just wanted to clarify it so people can
      up their mind.
      - do not require form params namespacing
      - do not prevent portlets from doing it (but don't add an extra
      penalty on
      those who don't want to do it)
      - do not change portlet programming models, allow them to use the
      they have today
      - do not require a constant prefix accross requests (although we coud
      about it, portletInstanceKey is already someting similar)
      - have a symmetric model, i.e. portlet gets back what it encodes
      - try to avoid unnecessary rewriting steps

      The whole proposal simply bases on two facts:
      - why not force consumers to always provide a namespace prefix? today
      it is
      - using wsrp_rewrite_ for form param names is problematic and should
      not be
      used (we discussed it already)

      1. Consumer always provide namespacePrefix
      This way Producer can rely on it and always return the prefix to the
      portlets if the request it, e.g. they call getNamepace() in the
      I'm pretty sure other APIs will have similar means.
      There is no real penalty on the consumer, they can easily compute one
      page AND they already need some means for themselves anyway.
      So here portltes can encode their form field names using that
      The only thing they need is to remember the prefix they used.
      This can easily be stored in the portltet's interactionState.
      This is completly transparent to the consumer AND producer and
      require any additional rewriting, parsing, stripping etc.

      2. do not use wsrp_rewrite_ in form parameter names
      a) there is no need for it if we have 1.
      b) as said it is very problematic, and was not the initial intent of
      wsrp_rewrite_. The intent was to namespace *one time* the markup
      without a
      flow back. It seems the stretch we want to do here is to large.
      c) in fact portlets using getNamepace() and 1. will never see a
      wsrp_rewrite_ anymore, so from a dynamic UI generation point of view
      is no need to use wsrp_rewrite_
      d) portlets with static content can still use wsrp_rewrite_ as they
      use for
      1.0 we don't break anything

      3. the resource discussion we had last thursday
      The proposal on the table doesn't solve the problem anyway as I
      Let's think through it:
      - in 1.0 it never could work and indeed we discouraged people from
      namespacing form field names.
      - if a resource (e.g. servlet) uses wsrp_rewrite_ we really can
      consider it
      as being "WSRP aware", i.e. we can't claim that in this case the
      is completly WSRP agnostic.
      - if the above is true why not pass the "WSRP context" to the
      resource via
      the resource URL. In this case why not pass the namespacePrefix to
      This is how it could work:
      1. portlet gets called and obtains the namespacePrefix
      2. portlet encodes a resource URL and as a parameter passes the
      namespecePrefix to be used (indeed it needed to be a subSpace of the
      initial namespace in the case the portlet AND the resouce generate
      forms -
      use case?)
      3. resource received ns prefix can use it, can also encode the prefix
      by various means.

      Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,

             Richard Jacob
      IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
      Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
      WSRP Team Lead & Technical Lead
      WSRP Standardization
      Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469  -  Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
      Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com




                  09/06/2005 11:17          g


                                            Re: [wsrp-interfaces]

                                            interactionFieldPrefix and

                                            namespacing form params

      Hi all,

      I just decided to stress you further on the topic what we discussed
      week :-)
      I started to think through what we proposed and decided to give it a
      So here is what I understood as the general idea, please correct me
      if I'm
      - introduce a new WSRP url parameter containing the namespace which
      used by the producer container and passed to the portlets, e.g. if
      call getNamespace()
      - we assumed implicitly that the value of the new param is flowing
      back (in
      InteractionParams and MarkupParams?)

      What does it bring/help or was the intent of it?
      - do not require namespacePrefix to be mandatory
      - allow usage of wsrp_rewrite_ as the namespace prefix, here we
      refered to resources using rewriting
      - do not require the namespacePrefix to be constant across requests
      - anything I missed?

      I've been playing a little bit with it, here are some thoughts
      1. portlets do not use wrsp_rewrite_ for form params namespacing
      - it seems we're introducing some kind of namespace persistance
      requests through the backdoor.
      Once the producer container decides to pick up a namespacePrefix from
      runtime context it is "persisted" in the URLs.
      The Consumer is forced to send it back -> Producer uses it again and
      it in the URLs.
      While this seems an interesting means at the first glance, it
      some problems.
      - How can consumers guarantee that they do not assign a new
      on a page which clashes with the existing ones?
      - How does this new value relate with the existing namespacePrefix,
      quite confusing here? Is the namespacePrefix assigned the new value
      the URL?
      2. portlets using wsrp_rewrite_ in form names as the ns prefix
      We saw that this is quite problematic. The intent of the proposal
      using the
      URL param was that the URL param itself gets rewritten by the
      consumer to
      the "real" namespace as well as the form fields in the markup. Thus
      portlets/the producer can obtain the consumer assigned namespace to
      identify the form params.
      - Do we expect that Producers in this case pick up the assigned
      and rewrite it back again to wsrp_rewrite_ so that rewriting is
      used? -> additional producer rewriting
      - If not we have just one wsrp_rewrite_ usage and then fall back to a
      namespace prefix with the implication I described in 1. ?
      - I think we change the rewriting algorithms here: What do consumers
      do if
      the wsrp rewrite token appears as a parameter value in the rewrite
      Aren't parameter values opaque here? Do your rewriting implementation
      parameter values in a rewrite URL?
      3. Resources using URL rewriting
      I think the proposal doesn't really solve the problem. The main
      here is:
      - How does the namespace prefix assigned by the consumer flow back to
      - If it needed to flow back to the reasource it needs needs to be
      part of
      the resource URL not the rewrite URL. But as of today, resource URLs
      opaque to the Consumer and it shouldn't touch them.

      So when thinking through it, things really seem to become clumsy
      here, too
      with not adding to much value here.
      There are some implication in the proposal, which haven't been
      through, yet.

      Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,

             Richard Jacob
      IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
      Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
      WSRP Team Lead & Technical Lead
      WSRP Standardization
      Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469  -  Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
      Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]