Thanks Chris. Is there a reason why you added it to the wiki and not to the documentation section in the site?
On 28 March 2013 14:51, Erin Noe-Payne <[email protected]> wrote: > Excellent, thanks Chris. > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I went ahead and copied the JS Documentation from the review to the wiki > > [1]. It need some more formatting but it will do for now. > > > > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/rave/JSAPI > > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Erin Noe-Payne < > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:48 PM, Matt Franklin < > > [email protected] > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Wednesday, March 27, 2013, Erin Noe-Payne wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > I believe that I dropped some logic that was hard coding iframe > > sizes > > >> in > > >> > > js. The assumption being that javascript shouldn't be sizing > > anything > > >> > from > > >> > > the container side - it should just be a css rule. The only > > exception > > >> > > should be calls through the gadget api or preferred height / width > > as > > >> > > defined in the gadget xml. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > In that case, we should update the base CSS > > >> > > > >> > > >> I did. > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for the pointer Erin. I found the issue on my side with the css. > > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Chris Geer < > [email protected]> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Chris Geer < > > [email protected]> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Erin Noe-Payne < > > >> > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Matt Franklin < > > >> > > > [email protected] > > >> > > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > On Wednesday, March 27, 2013, Chris Geer wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > I'm struggling with the new JS API quite a bit while > trying > > >> to > > >> > > > >> integrate > > >> > > > >> > it > > >> > > > >> > > into my application. It's turning into a lot of trial and > > >> error > > >> > > > about > > >> > > > >> > what > > >> > > > >> > > functions were renamed and what functions were removed or > > >> don't > > >> > > seem > > >> > > > >> to > > >> > > > >> > > work. I like the new approach but I'm concerned that > we've > > >> lost > > >> > > > >> > > capabilities and I'm not sure how we test for that. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > I have seen a couple of things missing. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Definitely a few things were lost in transition, especially > > from > > >> the > > >> > > > >> portal > > >> > > > >> functionality side. One example would be the whole concept of > > >> mobile > > >> > > ui. > > >> > > > >> Ideally we don't want to lose any core functionality. > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > It happens during any major transition, it's expected. Like I > > >> said, I > > >> > > > just > > >> > > > > don't like the fact we can't easily detect the issues. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > My latest two struggles are: > > >> > > > >> > > - Registering custom popups: There used to be a method > > >> called > > >> > > > >> > > rave.registerPopup that would allow for a custom popup > > >> > definition > > >> > > to > > >> > > > >> be > > >> > > > >> > > added. That seems to have gone away and now the popups > seem > > >> to > > >> > be > > >> > > > >> > > registered privately. I'm not sure if just adding a popup > > as > > >> a > > >> > new > > >> > > > >> view > > >> > > > >> > is > > >> > > > >> > > good enough or not. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> I didn't call this out clearly enough, but popups now use the > > new > > >> > > > >> registerView functionality. The idea is that rave core > doesn't > > >> know > > >> > > > >> anything about the ui but it generically supports the > > >> registration > > >> > and > > >> > > > use > > >> > > > >> of view objects that widgets can be rendered into. > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> So when your gadget makes an openviews call to render in > > "modal" > > >> or > > >> > > > >> "asdf", > > >> > > > >> rave attempts to render into a registered view with the > > matching > > >> > name: > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/rave/blob/trunk/rave-portal-resources/src/main/webapp/static/script/core/rave_opensocial.js#L92 > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> You need to refactor your popup definitions slightly to > confirm > > >> to > > >> > the > > >> > > > new > > >> > > > >> register view spec. Rave portal registers that same 3 popup > > >> views as > > >> > > > >> before, but you can override by registering your custom view > > with > > >> > the > > >> > > > same > > >> > > > >> name. For reference you can see how I tied the existing > gadget > > >> > > > >> definitions > > >> > > > >> into the new api - honestly it is not the best approach but > it > > >> was > > >> > the > > >> > > > >> quickest way to get our current portal code to plug in to the > > new > > >> > api: > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/rave/blob/trunk/rave-portal-resources/src/main/webapp/static/script/portal/rave_ui.js#L871 > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > - Provider Initialization: We make big use of the > > >> initialization > > >> > > > chain > > >> > > > >> by > > >> > > > >> > > calling rave.registerOnProvidersInitizalizedHandler(). > This > > >> > method > > >> > > > >> still > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
