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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp-wsia message

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


Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured Por tlet


Title: Message
Taking it half a step back, is there an agreement that if a Producer offers three entities, Weather 1, Weather 2 (both sharing the same Java classes) and Stock 1, then there isn't (=shouldn't be) any way that the Consumer could tell that Weather 1 and Weather 2 are "more related" to each other?
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 8:01 AM
To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured Por tlet


I agree to Rich.
There is no derived relationship between POEs and CCEs nor between 'source'
CCEs and 'target' CCEs which may result from a clone operation or a clone
on write.
I remember some F2Fes ago we agreed to stay silent about such a
relationship and leave it up to the implementors.
Therefor we shouldn't imply such a (hierarchycal) relationship in our
naming scheme.

Gil, you state that POEs are 'portlet types'. I think this doesn't hit it
very well because POEs can be used directly - just like CCEs.
Therefor one could say that POEs are "configured portlets" - here with a
kind of a default configuration which may be used right out of the box.

I like Rich's proposal to define "Producer Configured Portlets" and
"Consumer Configured Portlets" whenever a distinction is needed.

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         |
|         |                            |
|         |           01/06/2003 09:54 |
|         |           PM               |
|---------+---------------------------->
  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

  |                                                                                                                                                  |

  |       To:       wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org                                                                                                   |

  |       cc:                                                                                                                                        |

  |       Subject:  RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured Por       tlet                                                     |

  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|




I now see the distinction you are making, but do not think it holds up. A
CCE may be used as the basis for a clone just as well as a POE. There is
no derived relationship ... they just happen to have properties by the
same name. The rough java equivalent is instance.clone() rather than
class.newInstance(). You start with an instance and end up with a new
instance. They both refer back to the same underlying code, but there is
no class/instance type relationship between them.

Rich Thompson




Gil Tayar <Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com>
01/06/2003 02:22 PM

        To:     "'wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org'"
<wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org>
        cc:
        Subject:        RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or
Configured Por  tlet


On the second issue, I agree. There is no difference between the ops and
the
portlets generated. I thought that's what I said...

Again - if I have two POEs that share the same code, are they considered
distinct? The spec says "yes". A Consumer should not know (or care) that
they share the same code. There is _nothing_ common to them (at least
spec-wise), except that they probably have the same names and types for
the
properties . OTOH, if I clone/clone-on-write a POE to generate a CCE, the
POE is a "base" and the "CCE" is "derived". For example, one can assume
they
have the same properties (or else, all hell breaks lose in hierarchical
portals, which will assume this).

Thus, the spec says
1) that all POEs are distinct.
2) The POE is a base for all its derived CCEs.

That sounds like a base/derived,class/instnce,protoype/instance type of
thing.

Thus POE --> Portlet, and CCE --> Configured Portlets.

Ah, I love going around in circles. People besides Rich and Subbu, I
beseach
thee - help us here!
Gil

-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 20:29
To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured Por
tlet


The problem that I see with calling either "Portlet" is that many readers
will take this as the code with whatever default settings the developer
had for the properties. The spec currently has the Producer publishing a
set of entities, each of which represents some particular code and a set
of properties. I would not want to introduce confusion by calling these
configurations "Portlets".

You also seem to be drawing a distinction between entities created
directly by calling cloneEntity() and those created indirectly through
clone-on-write. I would note that the ONLY distinction between these is
the name of the operation (and associated semantics) that caused the
clone. The information, scope, usability, configurability, etc of what is
returned to the Consumer is the same for both cases.

I think that since the entities published by Producer are usable directly,

they should be described using the same terminology as those customized by

Consumers.

The net result for me is that we should introduce a definition for
"Portlet" that matches common usage and then describe what is now called
an entity as a "Configured Portlet". When we need the distinction, we have

"Producer Configured Portlet" and "Consumer Configured Portlet" (which
happens to match exactly to what they are ...).

Rich Thompson




Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>
01/06/2003 11:17 AM

        To:     wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or

Configured Por tlet


Gil,

I'm a bit confused by your suggestion at the end. Are you saying that
the spec *will not* make any distinction between these two? If so, I
second your suggestion.

Regards,

Subbu

Gil Tayar wrote:
> Thus, Portlet has no meaning in the spec (at least not in the
> normative section, because the protocol ignores the issue of "type"
> entirely), and we're left just with "Configured Portlet".
>
> As I said previously, I would make Portlet = POE and Configured
Portlet=CCE,
> and drop the old names. Two reasons:
>
> 1. CCE is badly named - the producer can, and in copy-on-write does,
create
> a CCE.
> 2. The POE is a portlet type. Even if two POEs have _identical_ lists
> of properties, the Consumer _must_ treat them as having different
> types. In other words, for POE's, the Consumer (and the spec) cannot
> know that two POEs have the same type, and thus - they have different
> type.
>
> So my suggestion again, is that POEs will now be called portlets, and
CCEs
> will now be called Configured Portlets, and both are "Portlets" fronm
the
> specs point of view.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 20:44
> To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured
Por
> tlet
>
>
> Having glanced at these, my suggestion would be:
>
> *       Portlet: an object that implements a particular interface (e.g.
> the Java Portlet interface) and which normally exposes a set of
> configuration properties. For example, a "stock quote" Portlet may have
a
> "listOfStocks" property and a "numberOfStocksToDisplayOnFirstPage"
> property.
> *       Configured Portlet: a Portlet with a particular configuration of


> its properties. A Producer is a Web Service that publishes one or more
> Configured Portlets; for example, two configurations of a "stock quote"
> Portlet and a single configuration of a "weather" Portlet - the
> specification calls these Producer Configured Portlets. The Consumer can


> create additional configurations from these - which the specification
> calls Consumer Configured Portlets.
>
> Rich Thompson
>
>
>
>
> Gil Tayar <Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com>
> 12/22/2002 02:43 AM
>
>         To:     wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
>         cc:
>         Subject:        RE: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration,
or
> Configured Por  tlet
>
>
> An alternative to the three options below, is the following (quoted
> from

> the modified Primer attached):
> *       Portlet: a Producer implements Portlets. For example, a "stock
> quote" Portlet and a "weather" Portlet. A WSRP Web Service can expose
> multiple Portlets from one Web Service endpoint, which the Consumer can
> use by sending the appropriate portletHandle. A Portlet is an object
which
> has a specific behavior - the data, business, and UI  it exposes - and
> specific configuration properties, which the Consumer and/or the End
User
> can set and thus configure the Portlet. For example, the "stock quote"
> Portlet may have a "listOfStocks" property and a "
> numberOfStocksToDisplayInFirstPage" property.
> *       Configured Portlet. Usually, the Consumer or End User do not set


> the values of the Portlets pre-defined by the Web Service. Rather,
> they
> create Portlets of their own, which are clones of the pre-defined
> Portlets, and set the values of the properties of these new Portlets.
> These Portlets, created by the Consumer or End User, are called
Configured
> Portlets, and they act just like any other pre-defined Portlet in that
> their handle can be used anyplace a portletHandle needs to be sent. Note
> that the specification does not assume that different pre-defined
> portlets necessarily have different behavior. For example, it is
perfectly
> legal for the Producer to expose two "stock quote portlets", both
> having

> the same behavior, and both having the same properties, but with
different
> values pre-assigned to those properties. This primer will not do this,
and
> there will be a one-to-one correspondence between the pre-defined
Portlets
> and their "type" (e.g. only one "stock quote portlet" and one "weather
> portlet"). This primer will use the term Portlet to encompass both the
> Pre-defined Portlets and the Configured Portlet, and use the specific
> terms when there is a need to differentiate between the two terms.
>
> There is a significant difference between this suggestion and the
> others
-
> this suggestion tries to differentiate between the Producer Offered
> entities and Consumer Configured ones, and suggesting that there is
> something "baser" about POE's than about CCEs. The reason why this
> differentiation is important is because the spec defines this
difference,
> while our terminology only hints about it - the difference being that
POEs
> are returned by the service description (and thus are "base portlets"
> )
> and cannot be destroyed.
>
> So my suggestion is to use Portlets to encompass both Pre-defined
Portlets
> and Configured Portlets (or Custom Portlets).
>
> Happy Holidays,
> Gil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gil Tayar [mailto:Gil.Tayar@webcollage.com]
> Sent: Thu, December 19, 2002 20:30
> To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [wsrp-wsia] Portlet, Portlet Configuration, or Configured
Portlet
>
> As discussed in the teleconf - attached are three copies of the
> Primer,
> with the suggested names above inserted into the text, so that they can
be
> viewed in context. I believe we should close this issue ASAP, so enjoy
> choosing between the three (and reading the primer :->)...
>
> Cheers
> Gil Tayar
> WebCollage
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>




----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>



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


Powered by eList eXpress LLC