RE: [wsrp][interfaces] separate administration interface

[Thomas Schaeck <SCHAECK@de.ibm.com>]

Alejandro,

what do you mean with ''but for administration tasks the portlet would have
to be aware of the  configuration data model of the producer" ?

-----------------------------------
Note: This is not a WSRP thought, it is about the Java Portlet API
I'd assume the configuration data of a portlet that is affected by the
portlet's administration belongs to the portlet, not to the producer.
All that should be required to achieve that is to define a standard API to
allow portlets to store/get back their configuration data (just like for
the instance data)
Then the concept of an admin mode in a portlet should work fine, since the
portlet has control over its admin mode and its configuration data model on
which the admin mode operates.
-----------------------------------

If you determine some data based on user roles in your portal
implementation, then this data maybe doesn't need to be part of template /
entity data itself - this seems more related to user profile / session and.
Since the roles of a user can change over time - potentially even within a
session - it seems the default values chosen for the instance would not be
appropriate anymore after a role change...

Best regards,

Thomas



Jeff Broberg <jbroberg@silverstream.com> on 06/04/2002 06:20:40 AM

Please respond to jbroberg@silverstream.com

To:    Alejandro Abdelnur <alejandro.abdelnur@sun.com>, Angel Luis
       Diaz/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc:    wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject:    RE: [wsrp][interfaces] separate administration interface





-----Original Message-----
From: Alejandro Abdelnur  [mailto:alejandro.abdelnur@sun.com]
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002  10:35 PM
To: Angel Luis Diaz
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).
[Jeff  Broberg] Maybe we should define some sort of common mechanism
for the configuration data model, or specify an interface that defines  the
abstract operations.

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.
[Jeff Broberg] are you suggesting roles should have  associated attributes
( key/value pairs )  ?

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 Centeraldiaz@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.comcc:    wsrp@lists.oasis-open.orgSubject:
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>