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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrp message

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


Subject: Re: [wsrp][interfaces] separate administration interface



Alejandro - wouldn't the administraton ( = modification of configuration
data) be done by editing the template and the condifuration by editing the
portlet instance? In this case the would not be a need for a separate
administration interface as the edit mode of the template already supplies
one. The advantage is a consistent handling of confiuration/administration
by simple switiching to the edit mode of the corresponding entity.

Best regards
Carsten Leue

-------
Dr. Carsten Leue
Dept.8288, IBM Laboratory B÷blingen , Germany
Tel.: +49-7031-16-4603, Fax: +49-7031-16-4401



|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           Alejandro        |
|         |           Abdelnur         |
|         |           <alejandro.abdeln|
|         |           ur@sun.com>      |
|         |                            |
|         |           06/04/2002 04:35 |
|         |           AM               |
|         |           Please respond to|
|         |           Alejandro        |
|         |           Abdelnur         |
|         |                            |
|---------+---------------------------->
  >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                                             |
  |       To:       Angel Luis Diaz/Watson/IBM@IBMUS                                                                                            |
  |       cc:       wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org                                                                                                   |
  |       Subject:  Re: [wsrp][interfaces] separate administration interface                                                                    |
  |                                                                                                                                             |
  |                                                                                                                                             |
  >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|



Angel,

Assuming that you have a common API to code portlets, then you'll be able
to deploy these portlets in any producer that support this common API.

Then, a portlet could execute all the regular user functions run in any
compliant producer, but for administration tasks the portlet would have to
be aware of the configuration data model of the producer.  Unless all these
producers share a similar configuration data model for storing
configuration, a portlet would only be able to do administration in the
producer it has been coded against (or another with a similar configuration
data model).

As an example of a different configuration data model than then one being
used used (templates) during the WSRP-TC discussions consider the
following: When a user selects a portlet and an instance is created the
initial configuration values for the portlet are taken from default values
associated with organization roles that are merged into a default set. So
based on the user roles the default values will be synthesized.

Regards.

Alejandro

Angel Luis Diaz wrote:


            I have other concerns regarding portability of portlets across
            portlet

      containers but this is outside of the scope of WSRP.

      I am curious! What are those concerns?

      Best regards,

      Angel

      Angel Luis Diaz, Ph.D
      Senior Manager, Next Generation eXperience Frameworks
      IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
      aldiaz@us.ibm.com
      (914) 784-7388 /  (914) 441-7594


      Alejandro Abdelnur <alejandro.abdelnur@sun.com> on 06/03/2002
      01:22:49 PM

      To:    jbroberg@silverstream.com
      cc:    wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
      Subject:    Re: [wsrp][interfaces] separate administration interface



      Jeff,

      In both cases, Personalization and Administration, I'm referring to
      the
      customization and personalization capabilities that a portlet
      exposes.

      As it has been discussed so far, Administration is just a special
      case of
      Personalization where the user, because he/she has an administrator
      role,
      can set configuration data at template level and because of his/her
      role
      can see/touch more configuration parameters.

      I see Personalization done through the portlet (i.e.: when the user
      clicks
      the EDIT button) as the user has the portlet in his/her portal page.
      The
      portlet itself knows how to persist the configuration data that is
      meant
      for a specific user, the one making the customization. Based on the
      user's
      roles more or less configuration parameters are exposed to the user.

      The main problems I see by doing Administration in the same way as
      Personalization are:

      * An administrator has to set the portlet template in a portal page
      in
      order to configure it.
      * There is no provision, neither metadata, to enable administration
      through
      other means such as a command line tool or a configuration console.
      The
      Administration has to be done exclusively through the portal.

      I'll prepare a list of requirements on this matter and I'll send it
      to the
      alias.

      I have other concerns regarding portability of portlets across
      portlet
      containers but this is outside of the scope of WSRP.

      Regards.

      Alejandro



      Jeff Broberg wrote:

      I am alittle confused.  If a portlet wanted to expose some
      administration
      capabilities such as allowing parameters to be modified for
      personallization
      wouldnt they expose an "Administration" action that would then be
      shown to
      the appropriate users based on their roles.  Or is the type of
      administration that you are talking about different from the
      customization/personalization capabilities that a portlet exposes ?

      jeff

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Alejandro Abdelnur [mailto:alejandro.abdelnur@sun.com]
      Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 7:58 PM
      To: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.orgSubject: [wsrp][interfaces] separate
      administration interface



      I have some concerns on the idea of using the usage interface for
      doing
      administration tasks on a portlet.

      I think we should have a separate administration interface. And,
      probably, some metadata (provided by the portlet) describing how the
      portlet should be administered.

      I'm re-posting a message I've sent last week, as it was a reply to
      another email, because of the subject, some of you may have
      overlooked
      it. Mike and Eilon replied to it, so you may want to check the thread
      in
      the archives.

      Thanks and regards.

      Alejandro

      -------- Original Message --------
      Subject: Re: [wsrp][interfaces]: Portal Usage Scenario
      Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:57:54 -0700
      From: Alejandro Abdelnur <alejandro.abdelnur@Sun.COM>Organization:
      Sun
      Microsystems, Inc
      To: "Tamari, Yossi" <yossi.tamari@sapportals.com>CC: "'Thomas
      Schaeck'"
      <SCHAECK@de.ibm.com>, wsrp@lists.oasis-open.orgReferences:
      <5199D0E7CA63D511BB6F0008C75DAD1403653228@dbwdfx2e.wdf.sap-ag.de>
      Tamari,
      Yossi wrote:



      Hi Thomas,

      I don't think that the fact the portal can set the portlet's
      properties
      means that there can be no plug-and-play.
      The Portlet can advertise its properties and their type (XML-Schema
      like)


      in


      its meta-data, and the portal can use this meta-data to automatically
      display a set-properties page. While this page can not be as
      customized as
      the portlet generated page, it has the advantage of creating a
      uniform
      set-properties look and feel throughout the portal.

      I'm just saying both options have their merits, and we should regard
      both.

            Yossi.




      I agree with Yossi. We should investigate/consider other
      alternatives.

      This is somehow related to an issue I've brought up in the
      WSRP/security
      conf call last week about "...separation of interfaces and roles for
      administrative vs. non-administrative usage. ..."

      I see some key problems on the approach we are heading to, where we
      do
      not have a separate administration interface from the regular usage
      interface. Administration and personalization are very different
      beasts.

      Using a definition from a colleague, personalization of a component
      is
      when a user customizes the behavior of the component for himself;
      while
      administration is when a user customizes the behavior of the
      component
      for one (other than her) or more users.

      I see personalization being done through the usage interface, as most
      portal frameworks -if not all- do it today.

      I see as a possibility to do administration of portlets through
      portlets, not the same portlet but a special administration portlet
      provided by the WSRP service.

      I have problems seeing administration functionality being done
      through
      the usage interface of the same portlet is to be administered.

      Personalization is about a given portlet instance for a given user.
      Administration may have to deal with roles, groups, templates, etc.

      In my opinion, it will be very hard to implement a portlet to do this
      administration unless the portlet is knowledgeable of the WSRP
      service
      configuration data model. A portlet knows about the business logic it
      produces presentation logic for. A portlet knows about the
      configuration/personalization parameters it needs. But a portlet does
      not necessary know how the container hosting the portlet organizes
      and
      stores the configuration or personalization parameters handled to the
      portlets.

      Another problems that I see are:

      * The administration interface should allow an administration tool to
      be
      built using portlets, but it must not impose additional requirements
      on
      the administration framework.

      * Administration should not require the administrator to put the
      portlet
      in his portal page in order to administer it.

      * It should be the responsibility of the WSRP service (or the
      portal),
      but not of the portlet, to manage the details of delegated
      administration.

      * Security of the usage and administration interface may be
      different.

      * It's delegated to the portlet to decide if a user can do
      administration or not.

      * The usage interface may have different scalability requirements
      than
      the administration interface.

      Finally, there are different specifications that address management
      of
      resources in distributed environments such as CIM, SMNP, JMX (Java
      specific). Also, in OASIS there is a proposal for a Management
      Services
      TC. We should investigate if any of them are suitable.


      Regards.

      Alejandro




      ----------------------------------------------------------------
      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