[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] Minutes for 7/10/02 conference call
The current draft allows the action handler to modify markupParams (ie. its
own state), but not the client request parameters.
Jeff Broberg
<jbroberg@silvers To: Michael Freedman <Michael.Freedman@oracle.com>
tream.com> cc: WSRP-Markup <wsrp-markup@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] Minutes for 7/10/02
07/15/2002 02:49 conference call
PM
Please respond to
jbroberg
is the action handler allowed to modify the client request parameters
before they are passed to the markup handler ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Freedman [mailto:Michael.Freedman@oracle.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 5:18 PM
Cc: WSRP-Markup
Subject: Re: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] Minutes for 7/10/02
conference call
Chris,
To answer your question:
This seems like something the interfaces subcommittee will need
to decide. If you guys decide that this is a required part of
the protocol then the url rewriting will have to incorporate
some kind of mechanism to indicate to the consumer what path to
take. Has this been discussed in the interface subcommittee
yet?
We discussed this today. The summary is that we are fine in
supporting the semantics defined by the JSR. Namely [excerpted from
Alejandro's message]:
There are two types of URLs, action URLs and URLs with no
action. An
action URL will invoke the action handler and then the markup
handler.
An URL with no action will invoke only the markup handler.
Both the action handler and the markup handler receive the
client
request parameters. So in both cases (action or non-action
URLs) the
markup handler receives the client request parameters.
Rich/Carsten will include in a future draft. As they specify the
details they will get back to us if issues/questions arise.
-Mike-
Chris Braun wrote:
Mike, Well the sad thing is that I can't explain it, I have to
admit I was a bit confused on the call. The more that I think
about it, it seems that in order to incorporate this
functionality the WSRP interface protocol would need to allow
for this. The consumer would probably need to determine
weather the action should be sent to the producer or simply a
getMarkup call along with the parameters. This seems like
something the interfaces subcomittee will need to decide. If
you guys decide that this is a required part of the protocol
then the url rewriting will have to incorporate some kind of
mechanism to indicate to the consumer what path to take. Has
this been discussed in the interface subcommittee yet? Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Freedman
Cc: WSRP-Markup
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: [wsrp-markup] [wsrp][markup] Minutes for 7/10/02
conference call
Chris,
Sorry I missed the call this week. Can you explain why:
JSR 168 has the notion of action URLs and render URLs.
An action URL causes an entity to execute its process
phase. By allowing two types of actions the entity can
bypass the action phase and allow for the render phase
to receive the action parameters. There is probably
nothing that needs to be added to the WSRP protocol to
address this. The producer container will be able to
handle this transparently.
How does the container/portal determine whether to call the
action method vs. the render method if there isn't an
indication in the originating URL? I.e. how is this handled
transparently? Are we expecting the JSR to encode this
information in "query string" parameters - hence its opaque to
us?
-Mike-
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC