myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott O'Bryan" <darkar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Date Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:05:54 GMT
Moving this to Dev list since it belongs there...  :)

Martin Marinschek wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> interesting, thanks for the further clarification. I see the problems
> very clearly now. Well then - let's start off this portlet bridge, and
> see where it brings us to!
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 6/11/07, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Martin,
>>
>> PPR in Portlets CAN be implemented using certain portlet
>> implementations.  But it cannot be done with generic JSR-168.  Here are
>> a number of problems although I'm sure there are more:
>>
>> 1. Action Requests have portal artifacts.  This means that a portal can
>> append content to a response (and typically will) making it insufficient
>> to use in an XMLHttpRequest and/or an iframe with ppr data and JS.
>>
>> 2. Resource Requests are not in-protocol.  This means that if we decide
>> to retrieve the PPR segment as a resource, we are not guaranteed to have
>> the same session..  Especially in remote WSRP type environments.  Even
>> if we "could", portlet-scoped properties on the session are prefixed
>> with javax.portlet.[PORTLET_ID] and there is no way in JSR-168 to obtain
>> the portlet id for the portlet instance.  In MANY implementations this
>> is the same as the namespace, but this is in no way guaranteed by
>> JSR-168.  This makes it impossible for all JSR-168 containers to support
>> a "servlet" type fallback.
>>
>> That being said, I have successfully used the "servlet" technique on
>> Pluto and WebSphere (when not running through WSRP) by using the
>> namespace as the portlet id, but I would rather wait for JSR-286 to come
>> out (which is looking like it will support BOTH an in-protocol resource
>> requests AND a special XMLHttpRequest handler) in order to enable AJAX
>> in a container agnostic fashion.
>>
>> Do you agree?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Martin Marinschek wrote:
>> > Hi Scott,
>> >
>> > sorry for the late response - I've been on vacation the last week.
>> > Yeah, your proposal seems definitely interesting. The bridge could
>> > certainly be a sub-project of MyFaces.
>> >
>> > I was thinking about why PPR wouldn't be supported in a portlet
>> > environment - is that due to the fact that the portlet server itself
>> > would need to know about PPR, and so it is entirely impossible to do
>> > this in portlet servers?
>> >
>> > I envision it might be possible to have the client-side AJAX library
>> > post back to a servlet instead of the portlet - would that be possible
>> > or not, wdyt?
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Martin
>>
>>
>
>


Mime
View raw message