Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

Andre,

I would say both producers and consumers must be prepared to accept 
multiple properties with the same name. How those are interpreted is an 
implementation choice.

Not sure why you exclude consumers.

Regards,

Subbu

Andre Kramer said the following on 11/11/2003 01:27 AM:

> Producers (not consumers) must be prepared to accept multiple 
> properties with the same name, yes, but free to map them down to one 
> single value.
>
> regards,
> Andre
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:subbu@bea.com]
> Sent: 11 November 2003 03:58
> To: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
>
>
> Given that WSRP is platform-agnostic, I agree that this is a JSR issue.
> This effectively means that portlet preferences can not be mapped
> consistently to portlet properties in WSRP. However, as Richard
> suggested, a more acceptable (and simpler, avoiding non-WSRP types and
> introspection) solution is to allow multiple values in the WSRP schema
> in a future version.
>
> Nonetheless, given the current schema, the consumer must be prepared to
> accept multiple properties with the same name.
>
> Regards,
>
> Subbu
>
> Rich Thompson wrote:
>
> >
> > We are expecting this technical note to provide guidance on how to map
> > various JSR168 issues into the WSRP protocol. Having preferences of
> > type string[] mapped in a particular way is an example of such a
> > mapping. In the absence of guidance, Producers should expect the only
> > construct a Consumer will map into an array is a schema defined array
> > construct. The purists would probably even argue that any other
> > mapping would be an error.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> >
> > *Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>*
> >
> > 11/10/2003 09:05 AM
> >
> >      
> > To
> >       Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
> > cc
> >       wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject
> >       Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
> >
> >
> >
> >      
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Are we expecting the JSR168 note to provide guidance on interop issues?
> > I hope not. To avoid future compatibility (1.0) and interop issues, it
> > would help to resolve this ASAP.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Subbu
> >
> > Rich Thompson said the following on 11/10/2003 05:58 AM:
> >
> > >
> > > Since the only place we know of this being an issue is JSR168's 
> use of
> > > string[] for preference types, I think we should hold off this
> > > discussion until the joint effort at producing a Technical Note
> > > seeking to ensure interoperability across WSRP of two disparate 
> JSR168
> > > implementations gets going.
> > >
> > > Rich
> > >
> > >
> > > *"Ross Fubini" <rossf@plumtree.com>*
> > >
> > > 11/10/2003 02:30 AM
> > >
> > >                 
> > > To
> > >                  "Subbu Allamaraju" <subbu@bea.com>,
> > <wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > > cc
> > >                 
> > > Subject
> > >                  RE: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >                 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd say we should use solution b), sending two values with the same
> > > name, as a recommended practice for the 1.0 specification.  We should
> > > consider this change for 2.0 when we cast a close on preference 
> storage.
> > >
> > > ross
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:subbu@bea.com]
> > > Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 8:55 AM
> > > To: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To continue the discussion on the multi-valued portlet properties 
> issue
> > > that I brought up a couple of weeks ago, here is a summary of 
> options:
> > >
> > > a. Use the predefined StringArray type. Producer introduces a custom
> > > wrapper type to hold StringArray. Consumers introspect the 
> response to
> > > find the wrapper type.
> > >
> > > b. Add multiple Property elements for each value of a property. 
> So, if a
> > > property "p1" has two values "v1" and "v2", the consumer will receive
> > > two Property elements one with value "v1" and the other with value 
> "v2"
> > > and both with the same name "p1".
> > >
> > > Arguments for (a) - clean, typed
> > > Arguments against (a) - needs a schema extension, can't interoperate
> > > without introspection
> > >
> > > Arguments for (a) - typed, does not require a schema extension
> > > Arguments against (b) - multiple properties with the same name might
> > > confuse consumers (although, with the current schema, it is perfectly
> > > legal to send multiple properties with the same)
> > >
> > > 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. 
>
> > >
> > >
> > > 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. 
>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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.
>