RE: [wsrp-interop] BEA Producer Updated (Resend)

[Andre Kramer <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com>]

Title: RE: [wsrp-interop] BEA Producer Updated (Resend)

Subbu,

Your analysis fits what our consumer does.

portletInstanceKey is optional so I'm willing to null it (but not to make it equal namespacePrefix)... Nope, that did not appear to work.

However, I would add that a consumer is free to replace the consumer re-write token with anything that it likes (as long as value is unique on a page) not just namespacePrefix.

Therefore forms (or other markup) should not rely on consumer re-rewriting to add a particular input name prefix.

regards,
Andre

-----Original Message-----
From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:subbu@bea.com]
Sent: 24 September 2003 16:18
To: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop] BEA Producer Updated (Resend)

Andre,

First of all, thanks for trying these.

It is likely that all the failures are related (including the method GET
portlet, login and upload) to consumer rewriting of form parameter names:

1. Our portlet runtime uses the portletInstanceKey (when supplied) to do
form databinding and scope session data. Accordingly, the returned
markup has form param names like "wsrp_rewrite_{actionForm.field1}".

2. For form databinding to work correctly, we expect the consumer to
rewrite the markup with the instance key. So the above form parameter
name becomes "[portletInstanceKey]{actionForm.field1}.

3. The portlet runtime then looks for form parameters scoped with the
portletInstanceKey. The data binding fails if the consumer sends param
names encoded with something else.

Here is what I noticed from your consumer requests:

- Consumer is sening a portletInstanceKey (looks like some arbitrary
URL-encoded key)

- namespacePrefix: The consumer is using "netlet0" for rewriting. So the
form parameter name becomes "$netlet0_{actionForm.field1}"

However, the producer does not understand such form parameter names in
the context of the portlet being invoked. So the data binding fails.

The rationale for this interpretation is that these are form parameter
names, and the producer needs to be able to understand the names to
process the action request - even when the consumer is rewriting the names.

I'm not entirely sure if the spec does say something about rewriting
form parameters, and how a producer/should behave.

I'm leaving this to the SG to debate. In the meantime, could you please
try using the same key for both rewriting and portletInstanceKey.

Regards,

Subbu

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-interop/members/leave_workgroup.php.