RE: [wsrp-markup] URL Rewrite Senario Question

[Eilon Reshef <eilon.reshef@webcollage.com>]

Title: Message

I think you are right in saying that this is analogous to the URL rewriting except that it's a simple namespace.

 

Where these two issues coincide is when JavaScript generates URLs,

e.g.,

document.write('<a href="' + myUrl + '">Click here</a>');

or, loading images, etc.

 

In this case, the question is how would those URLs be written correctly.

 

When the Producer has access to the URL that's used by the Consumer for action routing, it can (albeit with some work) write its code in a way that supports this, e.g.,

document.write('<a href="' + portalUrlPrefix + myUrl + portalUrlSuffix + ">Click here</a>');

If it doesn't, then either the Consumer should be smart enough to analyze and rewrite JavaScript (ouch!) or a different mechanism needs to be devised.

 

This is definitely not what the statement you quoted implies...

 

Eilon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Braun [mailto:cbraun@silverstream.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 5:01 PM
To: WSRP-Markup
Subject: [wsrp-markup] URL Rewrite Senario Question

I'm revamping the main Markup doc and came across a statement.  It states that for URL Rewrite scenario 2:

 

Con - "Uniqueness problem for JavaScript functions and variables when two instances of the same portlet coexist in the same page."

 

I'm not sure I understand this.  This is a namspacing/prefixing issue not a URL rewrite issue isn't it? The consumer will probably need to supply a namespace to the entity.  I see this as another token that will be rewritten by the consumer.  This token can be used so that HTML form controls and javascript functions can be namespaced.  We can provide a mechanism that allows this for both scenario 2 and 4.  I see this as analogous to the URL rewriting except that we are dealing with a simple namespace instead of a URL. 

 

Am I missing something?

 

Thanks,

 

Chris