[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
A new schema file would be simple to put on our Web site, but would we reference it from our wsdl with an include or import? Currently the unused (extra) types are not very useful as they are unreferenced, and I suspect people will want to build from a wsdl that has a stringArray element (from another namespace) along with the property "any" (e.g. in property type).
regards,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
Sent: 11 November 2003 17:32
To: Andre Kramer
Cc: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
One solution might be if we introduce an additional xsd holding StringArray
and NamedStringArray (and whatever types).
The namespace for this xsd would be different from our urn:oasis:...:types
(perhaps urn:oasis:...:extratypes :-) ).
Then we could easily use these types and wouldn't need to bother about
namespace=##other.
I think we could add these types without a spec change, since this is just
an addition of some well-known-types.
What do others think?
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Richard |
| | Jacob/Germany/IBM|
| | @IBMDE |
| | |
| | 11/11/2003 03:07 |
| | PM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Andre Kramer <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com> |
| cc: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org |
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I agree, the extension here should be:
<any namespace=##any>
We might even think about relaxing this for extensions? What would be bad
about using the wsrp-defined types in extension?
NamedStringArray could be one example.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Andre Kramer |
| | <andre.kramer@eu.|
| | citrix.com> |
| | |
| | 11/11/2003 09:36 |
| | AM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
|
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
You are right. I forgot about the namespace restriction (which does not
really make much sense for properties).
regards,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:subbu@bea.com]
Sent: 10 November 2003 17:53
To: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
In the current schema, the any element is specified with namespace
##other, and therefore StringArray can't be directly used in a Property.
I remember Rich also mentioning this in a call.
Subbu
Andre Kramer said the following on 11/10/2003 10:42 AM:
> We have both a StringArray type and element defined in our schema, so
> Richard is right in that we do not need a complex type. However, we
> currently say nothing about which wsrp properties are mapped to
> portlet preferences and the alignment note could address this (through
> a jsr specific type or namespace). In the meantime, I would rather we
> do not map string[] preferences at all than encourage (b - multiple
> occurrences of a property name).
>
> regards,
> Andre
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
> Sent: 10 November 2003 16:54
> To: Rich Thompson
> Cc: wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet properties
>
>
>
> I would prefer a)
> However why do we need a custom wrapper type here?
> Couldn' the StringArray element defined in our xsd be the first
> element in
> the <any> array of Property? (or even not necessaryly be the first one)
> This would mean that we don't need wsdl/schema introspection, right?
> Therefor it would be straight forward to serialize/deserialize.
>
> I'm feeling uncomfortable with b) since it defines a semantics for a type
> interpretation although we have a means to transport such an a type.
> In addition it introduces an explicit semantics on how to handle the
> properties, i.e. store one element with "name" but keep values in
> array, be
> carefull with the lang attribute, etc.
>
> We might want to think of a change of Property.stringValue to
> stringValues
> in a later version?
>
> However we have one additional topic with multivalues: form parameters.
> InteractionParams holds an NamedString[] for formParams. Even if we
> have a
> multivalue param (name: value1, value2) we do a
> (name,value1),(name,value2)
> here.
> Looking into html multivalue form submission, html uses the same scheme:
> -----------------------------7d39412f05da
> Content-Disposition: form-data; name="top5"
> Michael Jackson
> -----------------------------7d39412f05da
> Content-Disposition: form-data; name="top5"
> Nina Hagen
> -----------------------------7d39412f05da
> Content-Disposition: form-data; name="Submit"
> Submit Query
> -----------------------------7d39412f05da--
>
> From the servlet request one can get an string[] holding the values for
> "top5".
>
> Even if this might argue in favour of b) I'd like again to point out that
> we have a means defined in Property to handle this appropriatly.
>
> Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
>
> Richard Jacob
> ______________________________________________________
> IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
> Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
> Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
> Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
>
>
> |---------+---------------------------->
> | | Rich |
> | | Thompson/Watson/I|
> | | BM@IBMUS |
> | | |
> | | 11/10/2003 03:14 |
> | | PM |
> |---------+---------------------------->
>
> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
> |
> |
>
> | To:
> wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> |
>
> |
> cc:
> |
>
> | Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop] Multi-valued portlet
> properties
> |
>
>
> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>
> 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@IBMU
>
> S
>
> 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
.
>
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
.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]