Gerhard, Do you have any comments on this?
-- Blake Sullivan On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:37 PM, Blake Sullivan wrote: > The Trinidad WindowManager defines a lifecycle for windows which includes > events for windows being created, unloaded, reloaded closed. etc. The > implementation is free to use as much JavaScript as it needs to in order to > ensure better results, including more prompt clean up of resources. However, > from an api standpoint, that is neither here nor there. Trinidad already has > Window objects and it would seem natural that a consumer of the Window object > would like to associate state with it. The first place they would look is on > the Window object itself. From an api perspective, what is wrong with a > method on the Window object that returns a Map? > > Consumers already use the fact that Windows have stable identifiers and fire > lifecycle events to manage the storage themselves. This api handles that > task for the simpler users of the Window class. > > -- Blake Sullivan > > > On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: > >> hi blake, >> >> why do you think trinidad would provide a better implementation? >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >> http://www.irian.at >> >> Your JSF powerhouse - >> JSF Consulting, Development and >> Courses in English and German >> >> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> >> >> >> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >> Gerhard, >> >> If users want to use those implementations they should be able to and >> Trinidad should be able to delegate to them. However, if Trinidad has a >> Trinidad WindowManager installed, that WindowManager can do a much better >> job than any of those implementations regarding managing the lifecycle of >> the scope. In addition, if the application, or framework itself wants to >> programmatically shove objects into the Map representing this scope (which >> has always existed at least in the implementation), its weird that it should >> all of a sudden have to start using a new set of apis. >> >> -- Blake Sullivan >> >> >> On Jul 19, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >> >>> hi blake, >>> >>> no - my suggestion was that it should be a feature which can be used >>> independently. >>> if users need a window scope and they use >>> * cdi, they can use codi >>> * spring, they can use orchestra (if we implement it there as well) >>> * ~plain jsf, they should be able to use a simpler version which is >>> independent of a special component lib (e.g. provided by myfaces-commons) >>> >>> regards, >>> gerhard >>> >>> http://www.irian.at >>> >>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>> Courses in English and German >>> >>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>> >>> >>> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>> Thanks Gerhard. >>> >>> Did you want Trinidad to be configurable to delegate to Orchestra if its >>> available, in this case? >>> >>> -- Blake Sullivan >>> >>> >>> On Jul 19, 2010, at 12:23 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>> >>>> hi blake, >>>> >>>> it's similar to the conversation context id of orchestra - we just have an >>>> id for every window. >>>> >>>> (in case of @WindowScoped we just add a component to the view-root (before >>>> the page gets rendered). >>>> the window id is stored as state of the component. in case of jsf 1.2 and >>>> redirects we need an url parameter for the get-request. the implementation >>>> is pluggable - so it's possible to provide a custom implementation for >>>> storing and restoring the information. in case of jsf 2.0+ and redirects >>>> you won't see an url parameter. in this case we use the flash scope to >>>> store the required information.) >>>> >>>> i'll add all the details to the wiki page [1]. i've finished the >>>> implementation of the first draft by the end of last week. so i've to >>>> cleanup some parts and i've to write further javadoc and documentation. >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> gerhard >>>> >>>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/Extensions/CDI/DevDoc/Conversations >>>> >>>> http://www.irian.at >>>> >>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>> Courses in English and German >>>> >>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>> >>>> >>>> 2010/7/19 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>>> What code actually associates the scope with the browser windows? For >>>> example, in Trinidad, we have a WindowManager tasked with that job. >>>> >>>> -- Blake Sullivan >>>> >>>> On Jul 17, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi blake, >>>>> >>>>> @WindowScoped (provided by myfaces codi) is a portable extension for cdi. >>>>> therefore not every project will be able to use it. >>>>> >>>>> anyway, imo it would be better to provide a cdi independent version of it >>>>> e.g. in myfaces-orchestra and/or myfaces-commons. >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> gerhard >>>>> >>>>> http://www.irian.at >>>>> >>>>> Your JSF powerhouse - >>>>> JSF Consulting, Development and >>>>> Courses in English and German >>>>> >>>>> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2010/7/17 Jakob Korherr <[email protected]> >>>>> Hi Blake, >>>>> >>>>> Just FYI: we have also implemented a window scope for MyFaces Codi >>>>> (ext-cdi). Maybe you want to take a look at it ;) >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Jakob >>>>> >>>>> 2010/7/17 Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> We currently have scopes for: >>>>> Application >>>>> Session >>>>> PageFlow >>>>> View >>>>> >>>>> I propose that we add a Map associated with each window or tab that the >>>>> user is interacting with. This would slop into the scope hierarchy >>>>> between the Session and PageFlow scopes. We would also expose the >>>>> storage for the current window on the RequestContext. If no >>>>> WindowManager was exposed and therefore there was no current Window, this >>>>> Map would be the SessionMap. >>>>> >>>>> For high availability, each of the attributes stored in a Window's map >>>>> would be stored as separate attributes in the Session. >>>>> >>>>> At least initially, we would not expose this map directly through its own >>>>> top-level windowScope EL property. >>>>> >>>>> Proposed apis: >>>>> >>>>> RequestContext: >>>>> >>>>> /** >>>>> * Returns a Map of objects associated with the current window if any. >>>>> If there is no >>>>> * current window, the Session Map is returned. >>>>> * @return Map for storing objects associated with the current window. >>>>> * @see org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.context.Window#getWindowMap >>>>> */ >>>>> public Map<String, Object> getWindowMap() >>>>> >>>>> Window >>>>> >>>>> /** >>>>> * Returns the Map for storing data associated with this Window object. >>>>> If the environment is >>>>> * configured for fail-over, the contents of this Map must be >>>>> Serializable. >>>>> * @return The client data storage Map. >>>>> */ >>>>> public abstract Map<String, Object> getWindowMap(); >>>>> >>>>> Since we would provide a default implementation of getWindowMap using >>>>> import org.apache.myfaces.trinidadinternal.util.SubKeyMap, we would also >>>>> have to make SubKeyMap public as well. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jakob Korherr >>>>> >>>>> blog: http://www.jakobk.com >>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr >>>>> work: http://www.irian.at >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
