[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrp] Public review comment: extendedURLParameters
It seems presumptive to assume that other situations/uses don't exist where sending the parameters for the entire lifecycle would impact the behavior. I could certainly live with such a relaxation when an extended URL type is used but think it may be dangerous for existing URL types. -Mike- Subbu Allamaraju wrote: > I would like to cast this as a public review comment. > > Subbu > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [wsrp] extendedURLParameters question > Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 07:03:10 -0600 > From: Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com> > To: OASIS WSRP TC <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org> > > I have a question regarding sending extended URL parameters. > > Is a consumer allowed to send these parameters on more than one markup > operation during the scope of the client request that included these > parameters? > > In particular, if a blockingAction URL contained extended URL > parameters, is it valid for the consumer to send these parameters on the > following requests during the scope of the same client request > > - pbia > - handleEvents (only to the portlet that initiated the request) > - getMarkup (only to the portlet that initiated the request) > > The statement "Consumers MUST NOT resend a particular set of > wsrp-extra:extendedURLParameters on later invocations of WSRP defined > operations" in Sec 12.2 seems to be preventing this. > > During last week's interfaces call, it was pointed out that the request > ID notion for the ajax discussion can be mapped to extended URL > parameters, and this conformance statement stands in the way. Is there a > reason not to relax this statement by adding "beyond the scope of the > current request". > > Regards, > Subbu
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]