Re: [wsrp] getResource question

From
Rich Thompson <>
Date
2005-05-27T18:18:30+00:00
ID
Thread
Re: [wsrp] getResource question
The resolution when this was last discussed
runs counter to your proposal, namely:

- Keep the http proxy (wsrp-url) and
getResource (wsrp-resourceID) forms of fetching resources independent of
each other.

- Allow Portlets to specify both forms
or resource fetching (assist Consumers that only support one) with guidance
on which is preferred.

I see your point in theory (URLs are
allowed to have any length), but not in practice (most browsers limit URLs
to 4096 characters). If a Producer wishes to supply URL-addressed resources
via getResource, I don't see the problem in using the resourceID to either
contain or reference the URL.

Rich 

Subbu Allamaraju <>

05/27/05 01:46 PM

To

wsrp <>

cc

Subject

Re: [wsrp] getResource question

Such a change would imply a Consumer could extract
the wsrp-url 

parameter from the URL and send it as a resourceID to the producer. It

is somewhat awkward to do so. A cleaner solution would be to change the

ResourceParams struct to

ResourceParams

[O] ID                
  resourceID

[O] string                
url (language to say that this field is the wsrp-url parameter)

...

and add a conformance statement that clarifies that the Consumer MUST 

supply one of these fields (but not both) depending on whether the 

Producer specified a wsrpUrl or a resourceID parameter in the URL.

I also noticed that the Sec 10 is not clear if a resource URL can 

specify both a wsrp-url and a resourceID. We should further clarify that

"If the resource is not URL-addressable, Consumers MUST/SHOULD use
the 

resourceID parameter to specify an ID to retrive the resource. Producers

MUST NOT specify both a wsrp-url parameter and a resourceID parameter in

the same URL."

Regards,

Subbu

Andre Kramer wrote:

> Web browsers do in practice have a limit on the size of URLs which

> argues for the max length. However, I now see your point and agree
we

> could make the type of the resource identifier xsd:string.

> 

> Regards,

> Andre

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:]

> Sent: 27 May 2005 16:19

> To: wsrp

> Subject: Re: [wsrp] getResource question

> 

> I thought about that possibility, but I don't think it is valid. WSRP

> spec restricts IDs to be of less than 4096 chars (or less, depending
on

> how many bytes it takes to store a char), where as URLs have no such

> restrictions in the spec.

> 

> That's why I brought up the need for some persistence (atleast in

> memory) for wsrpUrl <-> resourceID mapping.

> 

> Regards,

> 

> Subbu

> 

> Andre Kramer wrote:

>  > I don't think we need to introduce a notion of some sort
of persistent

>  > resourceID. The resourceID parameter is just a way to point
to a

>  > resource and it should be perfectly legal (and normal)
to use a URL

>  > string as a resourceID. From the point of view of the protocol
and the

>  > consumer a resourceID is just a URI (a unique identifier
for a

> resource)

>  > - we do not describe or mandate the mapping mechanisms.

>  >

>  > Regards,

>  > Andre

>  >

>  > -----Original Message-----

>  > From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:]

>  > Sent: 27 May 2005 15:01

>  > To: wsrp

>  > Subject: Re: [wsrp] getResource question

>  >

>  > Andre Kramer wrote:

>  >  > Yes, URL-addressable resources need their addresses
(URLs) mapped

> into

>  >  > the resourceID resourceParam. Remember that
these (resourceIDs)

>  >  > themselves get put on URLs in the markup which
is why I though it

>  >  > clearer as well as more general to not make
them explicitly URLs or

>  > even

>  >  > URIs (even though these are likely to be the
common cases).

>  >

>  > My main concern is that, a majority of resources are static
and

>  > therefore are URL addressasble. Web servers and app servers
don't help

>  > map static resources to resourceIDs.

>  >

>  > We can encourage non-URL addressable resources to use the
notion of

>  > resourceID, but it is somewhat inconvenient to map static
resources to

>  > resourceIDs. There is some cost to managing resourceIDs
(perhaps

>  > persistently), and this discourages producers from supporting
the

>  > getResource operation.

>  >

>  > I find that it is more natural for producers to use URLs
for

>  > URL-adressable resources, and resourceIDs for other resources
(such as

>  > some bank statement generated from user's query), and that
the

>  > getResource should provide for both.

>  >

>  > Regards,

>  >

>  > Subbu

>  >

>  >

>  >

>  >  >

>  >  > Regards,

>  >  > Andre

>  >  >

>  >  > PS. Wish we had WS Addressing endpoint references
...

>  >  >

>  >  > -----Original Message-----

>  >  > From: Subbu Allamaraju [mailto:]

>  >  > Sent: 26 May 2005 22:42

>  >  > To: wsrp

>  >  > Subject: [wsrp] getResource question

>  >  >

>  >  > I've a question on the getResource operation.

>  >  >

>  >  > AFAIR, the primary use case for this operation
was to allow

> Producers

>  > to

>  >  >

>  >  > serve resources over SOAP instead of HTTP, which
was not possible

> with

>  >  > WSRP1.0.

>  >  >

>  >  > But it is not clear how a WSRP2.0 producer can
serve

> URL-addressable

>  >  > resources via the getResource operation without
somehow mapping

> those

>  >  > addresses into resourceIDs.

>  >  >

>  >  > My question is, why is not there a wsrpUrl parameter
in the

>  >  > ResourceParams structure? The lack of such a
parameter may impact

> the

>  >  > motivation for supporting this operation in
producer/consumer

>  >  > implementations.

>  >  >

>  >  > Can someone clarify?

>  >  >

>  >  > Thanks

>  >  >

>  >  > Subbu

>  >  >

>  >  >

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>  >  > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must
leave the OASIS TC

> that

>  >  > generates this mail.  You may a link to
this group and all your TCs

> in

>  >  > OASIS

>  >  > at:

>  >  >

> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

>  >  >

>  >

>  >

>  > ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>  > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the
OASIS TC that

>  > generates this mail.  You may a link to this group
and all your TCs in

>  > OASIS

>  > at:

>  > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

>  >

> 

> 

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your
TCs in

> OASIS

> at:

> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

> 

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

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
in OASIS

at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php