You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@myfaces.apache.org by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> on 2007/06/06 18:25:26 UTC
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Hey Martin,
I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been spotty.
I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question, documentation
is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the bridge
that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work currently
works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following limitations:
1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket on this
when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
still there. I'll check it out.
2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I had a
JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment. Things
that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much interest in
fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost there
but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant bridge
(or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts of the
spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a home to
host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in doing as
part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
process?
Scott O'Bryan
Martin Marinschek wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list - I'm
> sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you are not
> scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to bother you
> too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on this would
> be very helpful...
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> -------------
>
> Hi *,
>
> I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is there
> anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets with
> Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
>
> Especially I would be interested in:
>
> - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment, right?)
> - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's clear
> that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
>
> I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but that's
> RI, right?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
Re: [Trinidad] Portlet Skinning
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
Have we tried logging a bug against the 1.2 ref impl that simply says
clientId's are not namespaced and see where that gets us? :)
Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> Thomas,
>
> Jeanne is probably better to answer this question but I'll take a
> quick stab at it. Right now we have a portlet skin in Trinidad. It
> defers to the JSR-168 style classes where appropriate and then adds
> the additional styles we need. I believe it's based off the simple
> skin. It does okay, but there is certainly potential for things to
> look wierd.
>
> Trinidad is also working to support a mechanism whereby the Portal
> could optionally define or provide a skin for the Trinidad portlet to
> use. We're still working out the details on this though at this time
> it has some issues. A portal would be expected to implement these
> extensions if they wanted to support this behavior. Here is what the
> idea is though... A portal "written" using Trinidad and all of it's
> Trinidad Portlets would use the same skin. Or, a portal developer
> could develop a trinidad skin that correctly merges into their portal
> styling but with more "eye-candy".
>
> The pieces are starting to come together, but they are not quite there
> yet.
>
> Scott
>
>
> Thomas Spiegl wrote:
>> What about trinidad skinning in a portlet environment?
>> Is there a solution for adding the necessary link element to the html
>> header?
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>> On 6/11/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey Martin,
>>>
>>> One thing we "could" look at if 286 won't be released for a while is an
>>> extension to Trinidad to support a "plugable" ppr system. This
>>> would be
>>> a lot of work but we could have plugins for various portals that would
>>> allow us to enable PPR. If a plugin was not available for a particular
>>> portal then we fall back to no ppr. Still, we really need a
>>> functioning
>>> bridge before we can test this effectively so I totally agree with your
>>> comment about getting the bridge done first. Who knows, maybe 286 will
>>> be released by the time we get everything put together.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>>> > 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 <da...@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
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
[Trinidad] Portlet Skinning (was: Trinidad and Portlets)
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
Thomas,
Jeanne is probably better to answer this question but I'll take a quick
stab at it. Right now we have a portlet skin in Trinidad. It defers to
the JSR-168 style classes where appropriate and then adds the additional
styles we need. I believe it's based off the simple skin. It does
okay, but there is certainly potential for things to look wierd.
Trinidad is also working to support a mechanism whereby the Portal could
optionally define or provide a skin for the Trinidad portlet to use.
We're still working out the details on this though at this time it has
some issues. A portal would be expected to implement these extensions
if they wanted to support this behavior. Here is what the idea is
though... A portal "written" using Trinidad and all of it's Trinidad
Portlets would use the same skin. Or, a portal developer could develop
a trinidad skin that correctly merges into their portal styling but with
more "eye-candy".
The pieces are starting to come together, but they are not quite there yet.
Scott
Thomas Spiegl wrote:
> What about trinidad skinning in a portlet environment?
> Is there a solution for adding the necessary link element to the html
> header?
>
> Thomas
>
> On 6/11/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Martin,
>>
>> One thing we "could" look at if 286 won't be released for a while is an
>> extension to Trinidad to support a "plugable" ppr system. This would be
>> a lot of work but we could have plugins for various portals that would
>> allow us to enable PPR. If a plugin was not available for a particular
>> portal then we fall back to no ppr. Still, we really need a functioning
>> bridge before we can test this effectively so I totally agree with your
>> comment about getting the bridge done first. Who knows, maybe 286 will
>> be released by the time we get everything put together.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
>> > 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 <da...@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
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Thomas Spiegl <th...@gmail.com>.
What about trinidad skinning in a portlet environment?
Is there a solution for adding the necessary link element to the html header?
Thomas
On 6/11/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Martin,
>
> One thing we "could" look at if 286 won't be released for a while is an
> extension to Trinidad to support a "plugable" ppr system. This would be
> a lot of work but we could have plugins for various portals that would
> allow us to enable PPR. If a plugin was not available for a particular
> portal then we fall back to no ppr. Still, we really need a functioning
> bridge before we can test this effectively so I totally agree with your
> comment about getting the bridge done first. Who knows, maybe 286 will
> be released by the time we get everything put together.
>
> Scott
>
> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> > 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 <da...@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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
Hey Martin,
One thing we "could" look at if 286 won't be released for a while is an
extension to Trinidad to support a "plugable" ppr system. This would be
a lot of work but we could have plugins for various portals that would
allow us to enable PPR. If a plugin was not available for a particular
portal then we fall back to no ppr. Still, we really need a functioning
bridge before we can test this effectively so I totally agree with your
comment about getting the bridge done first. Who knows, maybe 286 will
be released by the time we get everything put together.
Scott
Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> 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 <da...@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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
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 <da...@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
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.
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 <da...@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
>
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
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
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.
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
On 6/8/07, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> perhaps we can make 1.2 to trunk as well.
>
> the current 1.1 has the "build-in" bridge, which is fine w/ me, since not backed
> by an official paper
>
> -M
>
> On 6/8/07, Thomas Spiegl <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > setting up a new sub project for an implementation of JSR-301 is
> > definitely a good idea. I think we should start a discussion at
> > dev@myfaces.apache.org.
> >
> > On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So... What are the next steps for this? Much debate and voting?
> > >
> > > :)
> > >
> > > Scott
> > > Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> > > > I'm totally cool with that and I'm pretty sure the EG would be fine
> > > > with that as well. We just can't do things the same way as we did the
> > > > old bridge.
> > > >
> > > > Also, JSR-301 has 1.2 as it's minimum Faces version, so I imagine this
> > > > could become the bridge implementation for MyFaces' 1.2 implementation
> > > > since I'm not sure much work was done with the existing bridge on it.
> > > >
> > > > I believe Stan Silvert would also be interested in working on this as
> > > > well. He's currently on the 301 EG as well and wrote the existing
> > > > MyFaces bridge.
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > > >> Well,
> > > >>
> > > >> things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o
> > > >> MyFaces core.
> > > >> So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
> > > >>
> > > >> -M
> > > >>
> > > >> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
> > > >>> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
> > > >>> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
> > > >>> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
> > > >>> developed as part of MyFaces...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Scott
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > > >>> > Scott,
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not
> > > >>> making
> > > >>> > it a "301 bridge"?
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > -Matthias
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >> Hey Martin,
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been
> > > >>> spotty.
> > > >>> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question,
> > > >>> documentation
> > > >>> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
> > > >>> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the
> > > >>> bridge
> > > >>> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work
> > > >>> currently
> > > >>> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following
> > > >>> limitations:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket
> > > >>> on this
> > > >>> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
> > > >>> >> still there. I'll check it out.
> > > >>> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
> > > >>> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I
> > > >>> had a
> > > >>> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
> > > >>> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment.
> > > >>> Things
> > > >>> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much
> > > >>> interest in
> > > >>> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost
> > > >>> there
> > > >>> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant
> > > >>> bridge
> > > >>> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts
> > > >>> of the
> > > >>> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a
> > > >>> home to
> > > >>> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in
> > > >>> doing as
> > > >>> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
> > > >>> >> process?
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Scott O'Bryan
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > >>> >> > Hi Scott,
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list -
> > > >>> I'm
> > > >>> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you
> > > >>> are not
> > > >>> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to
> > > >>> bother you
> > > >>> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on
> > > >>> this would
> > > >>> >> > be very helpful...
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > regards,
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Martin
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > -------------
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Hi *,
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> > > >>> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is
> > > >>> there
> > > >>> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets
> > > >>> with
> > > >>> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> > > >>> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> > > >>> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment,
> > > >>> right?)
> > > >>> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's
> > > >>> clear
> > > >>> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but
> > > >>> that's
> > > >>> >> > RI, right?
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > regards,
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > Martin
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
+1
perhaps we can make 1.2 to trunk as well.
the current 1.1 has the "build-in" bridge, which is fine w/ me, since not backed
by an official paper
-M
On 6/8/07, Thomas Spiegl <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> setting up a new sub project for an implementation of JSR-301 is
> definitely a good idea. I think we should start a discussion at
> dev@myfaces.apache.org.
>
> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So... What are the next steps for this? Much debate and voting?
> >
> > :)
> >
> > Scott
> > Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> > > I'm totally cool with that and I'm pretty sure the EG would be fine
> > > with that as well. We just can't do things the same way as we did the
> > > old bridge.
> > >
> > > Also, JSR-301 has 1.2 as it's minimum Faces version, so I imagine this
> > > could become the bridge implementation for MyFaces' 1.2 implementation
> > > since I'm not sure much work was done with the existing bridge on it.
> > >
> > > I believe Stan Silvert would also be interested in working on this as
> > > well. He's currently on the 301 EG as well and wrote the existing
> > > MyFaces bridge.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > >> Well,
> > >>
> > >> things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o
> > >> MyFaces core.
> > >> So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
> > >>
> > >> -M
> > >>
> > >> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
> > >>> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
> > >>> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
> > >>> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
> > >>> developed as part of MyFaces...
> > >>>
> > >>> Scott
> > >>>
> > >>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > >>> > Scott,
> > >>> >
> > >>> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not
> > >>> making
> > >>> > it a "301 bridge"?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > -Matthias
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >> Hey Martin,
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been
> > >>> spotty.
> > >>> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question,
> > >>> documentation
> > >>> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
> > >>> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the
> > >>> bridge
> > >>> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work
> > >>> currently
> > >>> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following
> > >>> limitations:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket
> > >>> on this
> > >>> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
> > >>> >> still there. I'll check it out.
> > >>> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
> > >>> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I
> > >>> had a
> > >>> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
> > >>> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment.
> > >>> Things
> > >>> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much
> > >>> interest in
> > >>> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost
> > >>> there
> > >>> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant
> > >>> bridge
> > >>> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts
> > >>> of the
> > >>> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a
> > >>> home to
> > >>> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in
> > >>> doing as
> > >>> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
> > >>> >> process?
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Scott O'Bryan
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > >>> >> > Hi Scott,
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list -
> > >>> I'm
> > >>> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you
> > >>> are not
> > >>> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to
> > >>> bother you
> > >>> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on
> > >>> this would
> > >>> >> > be very helpful...
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > regards,
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > Martin
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > -------------
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > Hi *,
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> > >>> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is
> > >>> there
> > >>> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets
> > >>> with
> > >>> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> > >>> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> > >>> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment,
> > >>> right?)
> > >>> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's
> > >>> clear
> > >>> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but
> > >>> that's
> > >>> >> > RI, right?
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > regards,
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > Martin
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Thomas Spiegl <th...@gmail.com>.
setting up a new sub project for an implementation of JSR-301 is
definitely a good idea. I think we should start a discussion at
dev@myfaces.apache.org.
On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So... What are the next steps for this? Much debate and voting?
>
> :)
>
> Scott
> Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> > I'm totally cool with that and I'm pretty sure the EG would be fine
> > with that as well. We just can't do things the same way as we did the
> > old bridge.
> >
> > Also, JSR-301 has 1.2 as it's minimum Faces version, so I imagine this
> > could become the bridge implementation for MyFaces' 1.2 implementation
> > since I'm not sure much work was done with the existing bridge on it.
> >
> > I believe Stan Silvert would also be interested in working on this as
> > well. He's currently on the 301 EG as well and wrote the existing
> > MyFaces bridge.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >> Well,
> >>
> >> things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o
> >> MyFaces core.
> >> So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
> >>
> >> -M
> >>
> >> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
> >>> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
> >>> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
> >>> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
> >>> developed as part of MyFaces...
> >>>
> >>> Scott
> >>>
> >>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >>> > Scott,
> >>> >
> >>> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not
> >>> making
> >>> > it a "301 bridge"?
> >>> >
> >>> > -Matthias
> >>> >
> >>> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> Hey Martin,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been
> >>> spotty.
> >>> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question,
> >>> documentation
> >>> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
> >>> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the
> >>> bridge
> >>> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work
> >>> currently
> >>> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following
> >>> limitations:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket
> >>> on this
> >>> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
> >>> >> still there. I'll check it out.
> >>> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
> >>> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I
> >>> had a
> >>> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
> >>> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment.
> >>> Things
> >>> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much
> >>> interest in
> >>> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost
> >>> there
> >>> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant
> >>> bridge
> >>> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts
> >>> of the
> >>> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a
> >>> home to
> >>> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in
> >>> doing as
> >>> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
> >>> >> process?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Scott O'Bryan
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> >>> >> > Hi Scott,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list -
> >>> I'm
> >>> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you
> >>> are not
> >>> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to
> >>> bother you
> >>> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on
> >>> this would
> >>> >> > be very helpful...
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > regards,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Martin
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > -------------
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Hi *,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> >>> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is
> >>> there
> >>> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets
> >>> with
> >>> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> >>> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> >>> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment,
> >>> right?)
> >>> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's
> >>> clear
> >>> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but
> >>> that's
> >>> >> > RI, right?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > regards,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Martin
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
So... What are the next steps for this? Much debate and voting?
:)
Scott
Scott O'Bryan wrote:
> I'm totally cool with that and I'm pretty sure the EG would be fine
> with that as well. We just can't do things the same way as we did the
> old bridge.
>
> Also, JSR-301 has 1.2 as it's minimum Faces version, so I imagine this
> could become the bridge implementation for MyFaces' 1.2 implementation
> since I'm not sure much work was done with the existing bridge on it.
>
> I believe Stan Silvert would also be interested in working on this as
> well. He's currently on the 301 EG as well and wrote the existing
> MyFaces bridge.
>
> Scott
>
> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> Well,
>>
>> things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o
>> MyFaces core.
>> So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
>>
>> -M
>>
>> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
>>> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
>>> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
>>> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
>>> developed as part of MyFaces...
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> > Scott,
>>> >
>>> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not
>>> making
>>> > it a "301 bridge"?
>>> >
>>> > -Matthias
>>> >
>>> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Hey Martin,
>>> >>
>>> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been
>>> spotty.
>>> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question,
>>> documentation
>>> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
>>> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the
>>> bridge
>>> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work
>>> currently
>>> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
>>> >>
>>> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following
>>> limitations:
>>> >>
>>> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket
>>> on this
>>> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
>>> >> still there. I'll check it out.
>>> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
>>> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I
>>> had a
>>> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
>>> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment.
>>> Things
>>> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
>>> >>
>>> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
>>> >>
>>> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much
>>> interest in
>>> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost
>>> there
>>> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant
>>> bridge
>>> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts
>>> of the
>>> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a
>>> home to
>>> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in
>>> doing as
>>> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
>>> >> process?
>>> >>
>>> >> Scott O'Bryan
>>> >>
>>> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
>>> >> > Hi Scott,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list -
>>> I'm
>>> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you
>>> are not
>>> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to
>>> bother you
>>> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on
>>> this would
>>> >> > be very helpful...
>>> >> >
>>> >> > regards,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Martin
>>> >> >
>>> >> > -------------
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Hi *,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
>>> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is
>>> there
>>> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets
>>> with
>>> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
>>> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
>>> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment,
>>> right?)
>>> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's
>>> clear
>>> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but
>>> that's
>>> >> > RI, right?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > regards,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Martin
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
I'm totally cool with that and I'm pretty sure the EG would be fine with
that as well. We just can't do things the same way as we did the old
bridge.
Also, JSR-301 has 1.2 as it's minimum Faces version, so I imagine this
could become the bridge implementation for MyFaces' 1.2 implementation
since I'm not sure much work was done with the existing bridge on it.
I believe Stan Silvert would also be interested in working on this as
well. He's currently on the 301 EG as well and wrote the existing
MyFaces bridge.
Scott
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> Well,
>
> things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o
> MyFaces core.
> So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
>
> -M
>
> On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
>> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
>> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
>> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
>> developed as part of MyFaces...
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> > Scott,
>> >
>> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not making
>> > it a "301 bridge"?
>> >
>> > -Matthias
>> >
>> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Hey Martin,
>> >>
>> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been
>> spotty.
>> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question,
>> documentation
>> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
>> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the
>> bridge
>> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work currently
>> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
>> >>
>> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following
>> limitations:
>> >>
>> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket
>> on this
>> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
>> >> still there. I'll check it out.
>> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
>> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I had a
>> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
>> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment. Things
>> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
>> >>
>> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
>> >>
>> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much interest in
>> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost
>> there
>> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant
>> bridge
>> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts
>> of the
>> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a
>> home to
>> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in
>> doing as
>> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
>> >> process?
>> >>
>> >> Scott O'Bryan
>> >>
>> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
>> >> > Hi Scott,
>> >> >
>> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list - I'm
>> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you
>> are not
>> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to
>> bother you
>> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on this
>> would
>> >> > be very helpful...
>> >> >
>> >> > regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Martin
>> >> >
>> >> > -------------
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi *,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
>> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is there
>> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets
>> with
>> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
>> >> >
>> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
>> >> >
>> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
>> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
>> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment,
>> right?)
>> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's
>> clear
>> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
>> >> >
>> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but
>> that's
>> >> > RI, right?
>> >> >
>> >> > regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Martin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
Well,
things like tomahawk, tobago and trinidad are also able to run w/o MyFaces core.
So why not making the bridge an own subproject?
-M
On 6/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
> distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
> for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
> distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
> developed as part of MyFaces...
>
> Scott
>
> Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > Scott,
> >
> > since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not making
> > it a "301 bridge"?
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hey Martin,
> >>
> >> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been spotty.
> >> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question, documentation
> >> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
> >> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the bridge
> >> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work currently
> >> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
> >>
> >> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following limitations:
> >>
> >> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket on this
> >> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
> >> still there. I'll check it out.
> >> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
> >> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I had a
> >> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
> >> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment. Things
> >> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
> >>
> >> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
> >>
> >> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much interest in
> >> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost there
> >> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant bridge
> >> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts of the
> >> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a home to
> >> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in doing as
> >> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
> >> process?
> >>
> >> Scott O'Bryan
> >>
> >> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> >> > Hi Scott,
> >> >
> >> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list - I'm
> >> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you are not
> >> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to bother you
> >> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on this would
> >> > be very helpful...
> >> >
> >> > regards,
> >> >
> >> > Martin
> >> >
> >> > -------------
> >> >
> >> > Hi *,
> >> >
> >> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> >> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is there
> >> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets with
> >> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
> >> >
> >> > Especially I would be interested in:
> >> >
> >> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> >> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> >> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment, right?)
> >> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's clear
> >> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
> >> >
> >> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but that's
> >> > RI, right?
> >> >
> >> > regards,
> >> >
> >> > Martin
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
That's certainly an option except that the Bridge in MyFaces is
distributed with MyFaces project. Right now the work that I have time
for will be needed for an R.I. This means it'll need to be able to be
distributed independently. That being said, I'm all ok with getting it
developed as part of MyFaces...
Scott
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> Scott,
>
> since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not making
> it a "301 bridge"?
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Martin,
>>
>> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been spotty.
>> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question, documentation
>> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
>> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the bridge
>> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work currently
>> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
>>
>> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following limitations:
>>
>> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket on this
>> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
>> still there. I'll check it out.
>> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
>> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I had a
>> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
>> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment. Things
>> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
>>
>> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
>>
>> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much interest in
>> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost there
>> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant bridge
>> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts of the
>> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a home to
>> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in doing as
>> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
>> process?
>>
>> Scott O'Bryan
>>
>> Martin Marinschek wrote:
>> > Hi Scott,
>> >
>> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list - I'm
>> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you are not
>> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to bother you
>> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on this would
>> > be very helpful...
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Martin
>> >
>> > -------------
>> >
>> > Hi *,
>> >
>> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
>> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is there
>> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets with
>> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
>> >
>> > Especially I would be interested in:
>> >
>> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
>> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
>> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment, right?)
>> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's clear
>> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
>> >
>> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but that's
>> > RI, right?
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Martin
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Trinidad and Portlets
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
Scott,
since we have already a protlet bridge here in MyFaces, why not making
it a "301 bridge"?
-Matthias
On 6/6/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Martin,
>
> I am sort of scanning the list but the past few weeks have been spotty.
> I'll post back to the list. :) To answer your question, documentation
> is totally not there since most of the work I did for Trinidad was
> running only in a "Proof of Concept" environment similar to the bridge
> that will be provided for JSR-301. I don't think this work currently
> works with the existing MyFaces bridge.
>
> In this proof-of-concept, trinidad works with the following limitations:
>
> 1. Some of the popup support does not work. I had a JIRA ticket on this
> when Trinidad was in incubator but I haven't checked to see if it's
> still there. I'll check it out.
> 2. The javascript libraries are not namespaced meaning two trinidad
> portlets on the screen at the same time may conflict. Again, I had a
> JIRA ticket on this and I'll check the current status.
> 3. PPR in Trinidad has been disabled in a portal environment. Things
> that would normally do a ppr, will do a full-page submit instead
>
> Other then that, everything including FileUploads should work.
>
> Now I notices in the past month or so there has been much interest in
> fully supporting Trinidad in a Portlet environment. It's almost there
> but the biggest hurdle we have is the lack of a JSR-301 compliant bridge
> (or something that comes close). Some of the preliminary drafts of the
> spec have been released, but the Project is still looking for a home to
> host its R.I. Is this something people would be interrested in doing as
> part of MyFaces or the Bridges project? If so, how do we start the
> process?
>
> Scott O'Bryan
>
> Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> > a while ago, I sent the inlined mail to the MyFaces user list - I'm
> > sending it to you personally now, as I thought that maybe you are not
> > scanning the list, and therefore missed it. I don't want to bother you
> > too much - but even a small pointer to any documentation on this would
> > be very helpful...
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > -------------
> >
> > Hi *,
> >
> > I have skimmed through the online documentation for Trinidad, but
> > haven't found anything useful about portlet compatibility. Is there
> > anyone in the Trinidad team who knows more about using portlets with
> > Trinidad, and can provide a link to more information?
> >
> > Especially I would be interested in:
> >
> > - file-upload - how's that handled in portlets?
> > - including the script/style-elements in the header of the page
> > (obviously, tr:document won't help in a portlet environment, right?)
> > - serving out resources with the resources servlet/filter (it's clear
> > that neither one will work in a portlet environment)
> >
> > I've heard about some jsf-portlet-bridge helping out here, but that's
> > RI, right?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org