Sorry for the format, I repost as following:
There are 3 options when we investigating the solution of namespacing:
================
Option 1*: Rewrite the gadget on the fly, separate conflict element by
adding a prefix or leveraging third party client side isolation solution,
such as Caja to do the isolation.
1) Add a prefix to the conflict elements when converting gadget XML to HTML
content on server side. ModuleId is unique to each gadget instance, so use
it as a prefix.
*
- Add a prefix to every global function and global variable, steps :
1. *Function definition: function methodName(){}
2. *Find the methodName using regular expression
3. *Global replace methodName to _moduleId_ methodName including the
definition and reference
- Add the moduleId prefix as the parent class to all gadget CSS
- Find all the fixed DOM id, add a moduleId prefix to the fixed id and
replace all the references to make it only apply to its self instance.
2) Leverage Caja to do the rewrite (this method isolate on gadet type level.
So it will not fix the conflicting global variable and conflicting DOM
element issue, still need extra work to fix that) Caja is a system that
transforms ordinary HTML and JavaScript into a restricted form of
JavaScript. The transformation is called "cajoling", and the result is
"cajoled script". The cajoled script is then run within a security sandbox
created in your browser. This provides a way to safely include arbitrary
third-party content on any Web page. Seems Caja is more of a JavaScript
scrubbing to prevent malware. Currently Caja works mostly in an iframe, such
as shindig, Yahoo.
Issues when leveraging Caja to render gadget inline :
1. Caja can't support external JavaScript and CSS, need embed the external
ones.
2. If the gadget is rendered inline, only one gadget instance can work well.
If there are two gadget instance, Caja will report errors when taming the
functions at client. As for the same gadget, the cajoled script is the same.
Still need differentiate them.
3. Rendering inline, the position of the content is not right. Seems the
Cajoled script did something to change the Dom structure.
Pro: No impact to existing gadget. All the rewritten will be handled by the
shindig rendering service internally.
Con: This method requires one strong tool to recogniz HTML/JavaScript/CSS
syntax to do the replace, do the javascript syntax analysis to find the
method definition and replacement as well as the fixed DOM id definition.
Currently there isn't a available tool to leverage. Also, to the developers,
they might get confused as their code has been replaced when they debug
their gadget on the client side.
<Kris>I was hoping we should keep Caja out of our first phase since Cajoling
has many limitations tha are still getting worked out. Once we have the base
working exploring caja for sandoxing gadgets will be a good option. Another
option is to explore OAHub for sandboxing the gadgets </Kris>
*Option 2*: Add additional restriction into gadget XML to isolate the gadget
instances under inline model. Define one scope object to gadget definition
to scope all the JavaScript/CSS/HTML under that object. Each gadget instance
has one scope object. Scope object for each gadget instance are different.
This approach requires the gadget developer to adhere to some guidelines to
rewrite their gadget. This approach is similar to IBM iWdget isolation
solution.
The gadget developer only responsible for declaring the scope class and
encapsulate the functions to the scope, but not control the instance.
Shindig will create the instance and make sure every call is controlled in
that instance. Shindig will create a global context and make the scope as a
property just like iWidget. This requires adding a snippet of script when
rendering. To separate the added snippet script and the script in the
gadget, the gadget developer should delegate the life cycle of gadget to
Shindig instead of itself. For example, the developer shouldn't call
gadgets.util.registerOnLoadHandleronLoad
function on the scope class, such as: this.onLoad = function()
{this.getHtml();}; and call this function by Shindig. The snippet is like:
first define a contextImpl object (This will be implemented as a new feature
call core.context to make it can be utilized by rendering in iframe. For if
the rewritten gadget need be rendered in iframe, still need call the onLoad
function which is in the contextImpl.):
function contextImpl(obj,gid){
this.scope = obj;
this.scope.context = this;
this.getGID = function(){return gid;};
this.getRootElement = function(){};
this.getElementById = function(id,root){};
this.onLoad = function(){
gadgets.util.registerOnLoadHandler(function(){
if(obj.onLoad){
obj.onLoad.apply(obj);
}
});
}
};
The context object will be exposed as a global object and provide some other
method for developer to use, such as getElementById.etc.
Then when rendering, Shindig will inject some code to create the superclass,
like:
__GID__context = new contextImpl(new scopeName(), gid);
__GID__context.onLoad(); Common guidelines:
1.Define an object to encapsulate the functions and variables to protect it
from each other. It is important that all JavaScript variables and functions
are scoped down to a gadget instance by using the “this” JavaScript keyword.
This implies that the gadget developer is using an Scope object which is
scoped to each gadget instance.
2. Leverage ModuleId as the prefix. Every artifact of a gadget must be
scoped to its instance id which is the moduleId. This value can be replaced
by the real value at run time.
<div id="__MODULE_ID___content_div" class="content"> </div> ----------> <div
id="0_content_div" class="content"> </div>
This makes the ID attributes safe against other gadgets and gadgets
instances of the same type. If you are omitting the use of the MODULE_ID
constant, you may experience ID clashes which may result in your gadgets not
working correctly.
3. Define an onLoad function to each gadget, don't call
gadgets.util.registerOnLoadHandlerClear
and simple to solve the namespace conflict issue.
2) Developers can easily navigate each gadget 's context and scope in
firebug.
Con:
1) Require gadget developer to rewrite his gadget if rendering inline.
2) Require add an attribute "scope" to the gadget spec and then use this
scope value to encapsulate the whole functions.
A sample gadget after rewritten:
//<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Module>
<ModulePrefs title="SampleGadgetWithScope"
scope="org.apache.shindig.smapleGadget">
<Require feature="settitle"/>
<Require feature="dynamic-height"></Require>
</ModulePrefs>
<Content type="html">
<![CDATA[
<style type="text/css">
.org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget a {color:#0000cc;}
.org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget a:visited {color:#551a8b;}
.org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget .content{ margin: 20px 40px;}
.org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget .button{
background:none repeat scroll 0 0 CornflowerBlue;
margin:0 30px;
}
</style>
<script type="text/javascript">
gadgets.window.setTitle('Communities',~__MODULE_ID~__);
org = {apache: {shindig: {smapleGadget: {~}}}};
org.apache.shindig.smapleGadget = function (){
var state = 0;
var prefs = new gadgets.Prefs(~__MODULE_ID~__);
var entries = prefs.getInt("num_entries");
this.getPref = function(){
return prefs;
};
this.changeState = function(){
state ++;
};
this.getState = function(){
alert(state);
};
this.getHtml = function(){
var params = {};
params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.REFRESH_INTERVAL] = 1;
params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.CONTENT_TYPE] =
gadgets.io.ContentType.FEED;
params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.NUM_ENTRIES] = new Number(entries);
var url = "http:~//localhost:8080/vulcan/shindig/container/community.xml";
gadgets.io.makeRequest(url, this.processRes, params);
};
this.processRes = function(obj){
var feed = obj.data;
var html = "";
html += "<div><b>" + feed.Title + "</b></div>";
html += "<div>" + feed.Author + "</div><br>";
if (feed.Entry) {
for (var i = 0; i < feed.Entry.length; i++) {
html += "<div>"
+ "<a target='_blank' href='" + feed.Entry[i].Link + "'>"
+ feed.Entry[i].Title
+ "</a> ";
html += "</div>";
}
}
document.getElementById('~__GID~__content_div').innerHTML = html;
gadgets.window.adjustHeight();
};
this.onLoad = function() {
this.getHtml();
};
};
</script>
<div id="~__GID~__gadget" class="*//org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget*//">
<h3>
<span >My Communities</span>
</h3>
<div id="~__GID~__content_div" class="content"> </div>
<input type="button" class="button" value="Change State"
onclick="~__GID~__context.scope.changeState(); return false;"/>
<input type="button" class="button" value="Read State"
onclick="~__GID~__context.scope.getState(); return false;"/>
</div>
~]]>
</Content>
</Module>
*
**Conclusion**: Option 1 does not impact existing gadget, but do some code
replacement on the fly. For gadget developers, they might get confused as
gadget client side code is rewritten by Shindig server. Option 1 requries a
strong HTML/CSS/JavaScript syntax analysizer. Option 2 add additional
restrictions to gadget spec to support gadget instance isolation with inline
rendering model. It is developer's responsibility to handle the conflict.*
================
Best Regards,
Kevin, Zhang Kai Feng
IBM Project Vulcan Development
IBM China Software Development Lab
2010/11/3 Qiao Yun Sun <[email protected]>
>
>
>
> Option 1: Rewrite the gadget on the fly, separate conflict element
>
> O
> adding a prefix or leveraging third party client side isolation solutio
> such as Caja to do the isolation.
>
> 1) Add a prefix to the conflict elemen
>
> 1) Add a prefix to the conflict
> 1
> HTML content on server side. ModuleId is unique to each gadget instance,
> so use it as a prefix.
>
> * Add a prefix to every global function and
>
> * Add a prefix to
>
>
> 1. *Function definition: function methodName(){}
> 2. *Find the me
>
> 2. *Find the methodName using regular expression
> 3. *Global replace methodName to _moduleId_ metho
> definition and reference
>
> * Add the moduleId prefix as the parent c
>
> * Add the moduleId
>
> * Find all the fixed DOM id, add a moduleId prefix to the fixed
> replace all the references to make it only apply to its self instance.
>
> 2)
>
> 2) Leverage Caja to do the rewrite (this method isolate on gadet type
> 2
> level. So it will not fix the conflicting global variable and conflicti
> DOM element issue, still need extra work to fix that) Caja is a system
> th
> that transforms ordinary HTML and JavaScript into a restricted form of
> JavaScript. The transformation is called "cajoling", and the result is
> "cajoled script". The cajoled script is then run within a security sandb
> created in your browser. This provides a way to safely include arbitrary
> t
> third-party content on any Web page. Seems Caja is more of a JavaScript
>
> scrubbing to prevent malware. Currently Caja works mostly in an iframe,
> such as shindig, Yahoo.
>
> Issues when leveraging Caja to render gadget i
>
> Issues when leveraging
> I
>
> 1. Caja can't support external JavaScript and CSS, n
> 1
> ones.
>
> 2. If the gadget is rendered inline, only one gadget instance can w
>
> 2. I
> 2
> well. If there are two gadget instance, Caja will report errors when
> t
> taming the functions at client. As for the same gadget, the cajoled sc
> is the same. Still need differentiate them.
>
> 3. Rendering inline, the posi
>
> 3. Rendering inline, the position of the c
> 3
> Cajoled script did something to change the Dom structure.
>
> Pro: No impac
>
> Pro: No impact to existing gadget. All the rewritten wil
> P
> the shindig rendering service internally.
>
> Con: This method requires on
>
> Con: This method requires one strong too
> C
> syntax to do the replace, do the javascript syntax analysis to find the
> m
> method definition and replacement as well as the fixed DOM id definition.
> Currently there isn't a available tool to leverage. Also, to the
> develope
> developers, they might get confused as their code has been replace
> they debug their gadget on the client side.
>
> <Kris>I was hoping we shoul
>
> <Kris>I was hoping we should keep Caja out
> <
> Cajoling has many limitations tha are still getting worked out. Once
> have the base working exploring caja for sandoxing gadgets will be a good
> option. Another option is to explore OAHub for sandboxing the gadgets
> </K
> </Kris>
>
> Option 2: Add additional restriction into gadget XML to isol
>
> Option
> O
> instances under inline model. Define one scope object to gadget definition
> to scope all the JavaScript/CSS/HTML under that object. Each gadget
> instan
> instance has one scope object. Scope object for each gadget instance
> different. This approach requires the gadget developer to adhere to some
> guidelines to rewrite their gadget. This approach is similar to IBM iWdget
> isolation solution.
>
> The gadget developer only responsible for declaring t
>
> The gadget develop
> T
> encapsulate the functions to the scope, but not control the instance.
> S
> Shindig will create the instance and make sure every call is controlled
> that instance. Shindig will create a global context and make the scope as
>
> a property just like iWidget. This requires adding a snippet of script
> wh
> when rendering. To separate the added snippet script and the script in t
> gadget, the gadget developer should delegate the life cycle of gadget to
> S
> Shindig instead of itself. For example, the developer shouldn't
> callgadg
> callgadgets.util.registerOnLoadHandleronLoad function on the scop
> such as: this.onLoad = function() {this.getHtml();}; and call this
> functi
> function by Shindig. The snippet is like: first define a contextImpl
> object (This will be implemented as a new feature call core.context to
> make it can be utilized by rendering in iframe. For if the rewritten
> g
> gadget need be rendered in iframe, still need call the onLoad function
> which is in the contextImpl.):
>
> function contextImpl(obj,gid){
> this.s
>
> function contextImpl(obj,gid)
> f
> this.scope = obj;
> this.scope.c
> this.scope.context
> this.getGID = function(){re
> this.getRootElement = function(){};
> th
> this.getElementById = function(id,ro
> this.onLoad = function(){
> gadgets.util.reg
> gadgets.util.registerOnLoa
> if(obj.onLoad){
> obj.onLoad.apply(obj);
> }
> });
> obj.onLoad.apply
> }
> });
> }
> };
>
> The co
> })
> }
> }
> };
>
> T
> T
> other method for developer to use, such as getElementById.etc.
>
> Then w
>
> Then when rendering, Shindig will inject some code to create
> T
> superclass, like:
>
> __GID__context = new contextImpl(new scopeNam
>
> __GID__context =
> _
>
> __GID__context.onLoad(); Common guidelines:
>
> 1.Defin
> _
>
> 1.Define an object to encapsulate the func
> 1
> it from each other. It is important that all JavaScript variables and
> fu
> functions are scoped down to a gadget instance by using the &this 8
>
> JavaScript keyword. This implies that the gadget developer is using an
> Scope object which is scoped to each gadget instance.
>
>
> 2. Leverage M
>
>
> 2. Leverage ModuleId as the prefix. Every artifact
>
> 2
> scoped to its instance id which is the moduleId. This value can be
> rep
> replaced by the real value at run time.
> <div id="__MODULE_ID___cont
> <div id="__MODULE_ID___content_div" clas
> id="0_content_div" class="content"> </div>
> This makes the ID attribute
> This makes the ID attributes safe against o
> instances of the same type. If you are omitting the use of the MODULE
> constant, you may experience ID clashes which may result in your gadgets
> not working correctly.
>
> 3. Define an onLoad function to each gadget, don
>
> 3. Define an onLoad f
> 3
> gadgets.util.registerOnLoadHandlerClear and simple to sol
> conflict issue.
>
> 2) Developers can easily navigate each gadget 's context
>
> 2) Developers
> 2
> firebug.
>
>
>
> Con:
>
> 1) Require gadget developer to rewrite his gadg
>
>
>
> Con
>
>
> C
>
> 1)
> 1
>
> 2) Require add an attribute "scope" to the gadget spec and then use t
> 2
> scope value to encapsulate the whole functions.
>
>
>
> A sample gadget aft
>
>
>
> A sample gadget after rewritten:
>
> <?xml
>
>
> A
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="U
> <
> <Module>
> <ModulePrefs title="SampleGad
> <ModulePr
> scope="org.apache.shindig.smapleGadget">
> <R
> <Require feature="settitle"/>
> <Require f
> <Require feature="dynamic-heig
> </ModulePrefs>
> <Content type="html">
> <![CDA
> <Content type="
> <![CDATA[
> <style type
> <style typ
> .org-apache-shindig-smap
> .org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget a:visited {color:#5
> .org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget .content{ margin: 20px 40px
> .org-apache-shindig-smapleGadget .button{
> background:none repe
> background:none repeat scroll 0 0 Cornflow
> margin:0 30px;
> }
> </style>
> <script type="text/ja
> }
> </style>
> <s
> </
> <script t
> gadgets.window.setTitle('Communi
> org = {apache: {shindig: {smapleGadget: {~}}}};
> org.apa
> org.apache.shindig.smapleGadget = function (){
>
> var state = 0;
> var prefs = new gadgets.Prefs(~
> var prefs = new
> var entries = prefs.getInt("num_entries");
> this
> this.getPref = function(){
> return prefs;
>
> return prefs;
> };
>
> this.c
> };
>
> this.cha
>
> t
> t
> state ++;
> };
>
> this.getState
> };
>
> this
>
> t
> t
> alert(state);
> };
>
> this.ge
> };
>
> this.get
>
> t
> t
> var params = {};
> params[ga
> params[gadgets.io
> params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.CONTENT_TYPE] =
> gadge
> gadgets.io.ContentType.FEED;
> params[gadgets.io.Reque
> params[gadgets.io.RequestPara
> var url = "http:~//localhost:8080/vulcan/shindig/container/community.xml
> gadgets.io.makeRequest(url, this.processRes, params);
> };
>
> this.processRe
> };
>
> this.processRes = function(obj){
> var feed = obj
>
> t
> t
> var feed = obj.data;
> var html =
> var html = "";
> html
> html += "<div><
> html += "<div>" + feed.Author + "</div><br>";
> i
> if (feed.Entry) {
> for (var i = 0; i < feed.En
> for (var i = 0; i
> html += "<div>"
> + "<a target='_blank' href='"
> + "<a target='_b
> + feed.Entry[i].Title
> + "</a> ";
> html += "</div>";
> }
> }
> + "</a> ";
> html += "<
> html += "</
> }
> }
> document.get
> }
> do
> gadgets.window.adjustHeight();
> };
>
> this.onLoad = function() {
>
> };
>
> this.onLoad = function()
>
> t
> t
> this.getHtml();
> };
> };
>
>
> };
> };
>
> </scri
> };
>
> <
> <
>
> <div id=
> <
> <h3>
> <span >My Communities</span>
> </h3>
>
> <div id="~__GID~__content_
> <span
> </h3>
>
> <div id="~__GID~__co
>
> <div
> <
>
> <input type="button" class="button" value="Change Sta
> <
> onclick="~__GID~__context.scope.changeState(); return fals
> <input type="button" class="button" value="Read State"
> onclick
> onclick="~__GID~__context.scope.getState(); return false
>
> </div>
>
> ]]>
> </Content>
> </Module>
>
>
> Conclusion: Optio
> <
>
> ]]>
>
> ]
> </Co
> </Module>
>
>
>
> Conclu
>
> C
> replacement on the fly. For gadget developers, they might get confused a
> gadget client side code is rewritten by Shindig server. Option 1 requries
> a strong HTML/CSS/JavaScript syntax analysizer. Option 2 add additional
> r
> restrictions to gadget spec to support gadget instance isolation with
> i
> inline rendering model. It is developer's responsibility to handle the
> conflict.
>
> Do you think it make sense?
>
>
> Thanks
> Best Regards,
>
> Q
>
> Do you t
> D
>
>
> Thanks
> Best Regards,
>
>
> T
> Best Re
>
> Qiao Yun, Su
> Q
> IBM Project Vulcan De
> China Software Development Lab(
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
> Tel: (86-10)
> Tel: (86-10) 82451085
>
>
> 抧 毈: 杒 嫗 巗 奀
>
> Address: 2F, NO. 28 BUILDING, ZHONG GUAN CUN SOFTWARE PARK, NO.8
> DONGBEIWANG WESTEN ROAD, BEIJING, 100Address: 2F, NO. 28 BUILDING, ZHONG
> GUAN CUN SOFTWARE PARK, NO.8
> DONGBEIWANG WESTEN ROAD, BEIJING, 100193
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> Jasvir Nagra <[email protected]>
> To:
> [email protected]
> Date:
> 11/03/2010 01:50 PM
> Subject:
> Re: Inline gadget rendering as a feature
>
>
>
> Sorry that was perhaps less than helpful. I looked over the thread you
> referenced and I think a few clarifications are needed. I realized there
> is
> a mis-interpretation that Caja is primarily aimed at "addressing malware
> and
> security concerns". The point is that the accidental problems that you
> mention above _are_ the security concerns Caja is concerned with - when
> they
> occur in trusted code, they cause the functionality to break. We simply
> happen to treat both this unintended incorrectness in trusted code along
> with deliberate attack by untrusted code as different instances of the
> same
> class of problem - that of isolation.
>
> If you are willing to ignore the javascript problem - which is the source
> of
> most of the complexity - you be mostly able to isolate html and css by:
>
> * rewriting all ids with a instance-based prefix
> * creating a new div with an class id that has an instance-based prefix
> * clipping to this div (this prevents a gadget from accidentally using
> absolute positioning)
> * rewriting all classes in the gadget to be scope to that instance-based
> prefix
>
> If you are not rewriting javascript, the problem then becomes one of
> asking
> that gadget developers use your apis to get and set html elements in the
> gadget (including when setting innerHTML) so that they actually get the
> right elements and don't accidentally clobber another gadget instance that
> has been inlined.
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 10:20 PM Jasvir Nagra <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > This is just one of the many problems with inlining two or more gadgets
> > gets you. The others include but aren't limited to:
> >
> > * css styles defined in one gadget will apply on other gadgets with
> > elements, classes, ids or other selectors that match
> > * javascript functions and globals between gadgets that conflict
> > * event handlers in one gadget bind to the wrong instance
> > * modification of javascript prototype objects in one gadget conflict
> with
> > others
> > * xml namespaces defined in one gadget bleed into another
> >
> > What you need is to be able to turn a block of html, css and javascript
> > into a closed function that you're able to instantiate multiple times,
> with
> > each instance getting a fresh copy of those properties it wishes to be
> able
> > to modify. This is the property that Caja gives you. Cajoling a block
> of
> > html, css and javascript gives you a block of html and javascript that
> is
> > safe for inlining multiple times. The difficulty in the case of Shindig
> > (which we are working on resolving and why inlining with Caja is not
> checked
> > in today) arises not from inlining html and css which are solved
> problems
> > but from exposing the opensocial and other gadget apis to inlined code.
> > These apis modify the javascript prototypes and other DOM objects on
> behalf
> > of gadgets and are a means by which otherwise isolated gadgets may
> interfere
> > with each other.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Kai Feng Zhang <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The first problem inline gadget rendering needs to solve is about
> >> namespacing conflict.
> >>
> >> Since some gadget declare a unique identifier for some element in dom,
> >> such
> >> as <div id="hello">, if this gadget is rendered with inline multiple
> times
> >> on same page, it's a problem of element id conflict.
> >>
> >> As our former implementation(in original patch to support inline) is
> based
> >> on the iWidget context concept and request the gadget developer to
> rewrite
> >> their gadget with a scope, which will generate a unique identifier for
> >> each
> >> element in inline gadget, to avoid namespacing conflict issue.
> >>
> >> It might be a little reluctant for gadget developer to accept and it
> also
> >> needs effort to rewrite thousands of existing gadgets. So we did not
> >> enable
> >> this implementation in our new inline patch.
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1402
> >>
> >> But currently seems we didn't find a better way to solve it. So could
> >> someone please review and propose any better way to do solve this
> >> namespacing problem?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >>
> >> Kevin, Zhang Kai Feng
> >> IBM Project Vulcan Development
> >> IBM China Software Development Lab
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Kai Feng Zhang <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > We originally posted inlining work directly into the existing
> container
> >> > shindig-container/server side components... see
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1402
> >> >
> >> > After reviewing some of these changes and learning more about the
> >> features,
> >> > we've stepped back and refactored those changes as a feature on the
> >> common
> >> > container. I add a new patch, which is based on new common container
> as
> >> well
> >> > as its new patch: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1460
> >> >
> >> > After apply the patch, access
> >> > http://localhost:8080/container/helloworld_common3.html you would see
> >> the
> >> > inline gadget and iframe gadget being rendered on same page, though
> they
> >> are
> >> > helloworld gadgets. Gadget requires "inline" feature will be
> rendered
> >> as
> >> > inline one.
> >> >
> >> > Have to say that introducing inline rendering would cause much
> problem
> >> for
> >> > gadget features, since most of them are design specially for iframe
> >> > rendering gadget. We will post the impacted aspects in following
> >> comments.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Best Regards,
> >> >
> >> > Kevin, Zhang Kai Feng
> >> > IBM Project Vulcan Development
> >> > IBM China Software Development Lab
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
