actually to avoid mixed-content warnings you'll probably want to match the scheme of the iframe URL.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Mat Mannion <[email protected]>wrote: > Can we set the scheme to be the same as the gadget URL, rather than > guessing at http? > > Mat > > On 10 August 2010 10:48, Paul Lindner <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm also seeing schemeless URIs leaking into the CSS rewriter output. > > Here's some output from samplecontainer: > > > > div.bubble { > > > > background-image: > > > url('//localhost:8080/gadgets/proxy?container=default&gadget=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%3A8080%2Fsamplecontainer%2Fexamples%2FSocialHelloWorld.xml&debug=0&nocache=0&url=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%3A8080%2Fsamplecontainer%2Fexamples%2Fbubble.gif'); > > > > background-repeat: no-repeat; > > > > width: 202px; > > > > > > What's confusing is that the tests as written > > (StyleTagProxyEmbeddedUrlsVisitorTest) expect this broken output. > > > > I'm going to set the scheme to http for now, I'd like to know why this is > > the way it is. I can see schemeless URIs being useful in a javascript > > context, but I cannot fathom how they're supposed to work otherwise. > > Gagan/John can you fill us in? > > > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Gagandeep singh <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> Hi Mat > >> > >> You could post a snippet of the html which has the scheme-less link, the > >> iframe you are talking about and the culprit <base tag> in gadget html. > >> That > >> should help dev@ community understand the problem better. > >> Also, you might want to take a look at > >> AbsolutePathReferenceRewriter< > >> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/rewrite/AbsolutePathReferenceVisitor.java > >> >. > >> It expands all the relative urls relative to the base tag provided in > the > >> html. It doesnt have iframe-src for now, but i guess it can be added and > >> might solve the problem your seeing. > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Mat Mannion <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > I understand the thinking behind scheme-less proxy/concat URIs, but I > >> > don't think they're working as intended. The problem is that the > >> > intention is that they should be on the same scheme as the iframe > >> > renderer, but we then insert a <base> tag with the gadget URI, which > >> > means that the URIs for /proxy and /concat are actually on the same > >> > scheme as the gadget - this is causing issues for us as we don't run > >> > the shindig server on HTTP at all. At least, this is the behaviour I'm > >> > seeing in Google Chrome. > >> > > >> > Could someone take a look at this and tell me if I'm right in my > >> > deduction that this is what's causing the problem? > >> > > >> > Thanks in advance, > >> > > >> > Mat > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Mat Mannion > >> > Web Developer > >> > IT Services > >> > University of Warwick > >> > Coventry > >> > CV4 7AL > >> > > >> > Tel: 024 765 74433 > >> > Email: [email protected] > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Paul Lindner -- [email protected] -- linkedin.com/in/plindner > > > > > > -- > Mat Mannion > Web Developer > IT Services > University of Warwick > Coventry > CV4 7AL > > Tel: 024 765 74433 > Email: [email protected] > -- Paul Lindner -- [email protected] -- linkedin.com/in/plindner
