Re: [wsrp-interfaces] Tomorrow's agenda

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

Mike,

Could you get the question of Ajax onto the agenda please? While 
discussing some of the topics below in the email thread, ajax was 
mentioned several times, and I suspect we will end up doing the same 
tomorrow.

Subbu

Michael Freedman wrote:
> I have attached a document that lists 3 open discussion items from the 
> wsrp list + the security topic.  I suggest we spend a little time on the 
> open issues but also make sure we have enough time to begin the security 
> discussion.  The topics have links to the mail threads so you can 
> refamiliarize yourself.
>    -Mike-
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> navigationalParameterDescriptions: 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/email/archives/200602/msg00027.html>
> Do we need to clarify language concerning consumers recognizing 
> like-named navigational parameters as related/auto wired?
> 
> Clarification: Resource URLs and markup params, etc. 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/email/archives/200602/msg00030.html>
> 
>    1. Stateless consumer
>    2. Meaning of title?
>    3. Change window state/mode?
>    4. Concurrency problems with sessionID?
>    5. During *getMarkup, handleEvents *and *performBlockingInteraction*
>       invocations the Consumer indicates to the Portlet its current mode
>       via the MarkupParams data structure"  Add getResource???
>    6. Clarity of structure vs reuse of structure -- Should we have
>       specific types to clarify that a few fields are no sensible?
>    7. Caching when using getResource of portlet markup ???? Not yet
>       raised ---
> 
> unclear behavior for dynamic nav params and transient properties 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp/email/archives/200602/msg00076.html>
> Why don't we allow nav params/transient props to be introduced 
> dynamically like events?  Should we?
> 
> Security questions: 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-interfaces/email/archives/200602/msg00003.html>
> Can we recommend that all producers support at a minimum UserName with 
> no consumer authentication?  Can we encourage all consumer to send 
> UserName with no consumer auth unless otherwise instructed to do 
> otherwise?  Will a producer work if it doesn't handle the WS stuff but 
> receives it?  I.e. will it just be ignored?