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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp-interop message

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

Subject: MarkupType question

Our mobile guys are looking to adding extensions to the MarkupType type 
that will allow Oracle to further qualify the markup type based on a 
notion of device type.  I.e. in the grand world of multi-device 
environments the mime-type isn't sufficient to qualify rendition 
support; it is useful to have a way to specify mime-type/device-type 
pairs as a way to qualify rendition support.  They asked me whether its 
legal for a producer to generate a portlet description with a markupType 
array which contains multiple entries with the same mime-type value. 
 [This occurs if the producer is using such an extension as it expresses 
the mime-type portion of the mime/device pair in the regular mime-tytpe 
field while the device type information in an extensions].  And if such 
a thing is legal if there are rules for how consumers deal/treat such a 
set of references?  Does it concatentate them?  Does it ignore all but 
one [the first?]? Does it ignore this portlet?  Any of the above as the 
consumer is free to do whatever it wants and we have no recommendation 
on what it should do?   In answering this question can you answer it 
both from the theoretical perspective [i.e. what you think the right 
answer is] and if you have a consumer implementation, from the practical 
perspective [what your current implementation does]?

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