Hi Andrew,

I've been looking around that part of the code lately as I was working on
View level features (http://codereview.appspot.com/4077043/).  I haven't
dug into your patch yet, but I think it will probably affect you.

I don't know if not implementing it in the gadget metadata service is a bug
necessarily, it's possible that nobody needed it until now.  For example,
Locales aren't exposed by this service either.  Remember, there is a JS API
for gadgets needing to access feature parameters that is part of the Core
Gadget spec called "gadgets.util.getFeatureParameters()".

http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/1.1/Core-Gadget.xml#gadgets.util.getFeatureParameters

Matt Marum


|------------>
| From:      |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Andrew Davis <[email protected]>                                        
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| To:        |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |[email protected]                                                       
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Cc:        |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |[email protected]                                                             
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Date:      |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |01/28/2011 03:14 PM                                                          
                                                                     |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|------------>
| Subject:   |
|------------>
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |Feature Param support in Gadgets meta-data requests, Features support 
extensible XML contributions?                                               |
  
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





We have been looking at using feature params in the current
implementation of shindig.
Currently we have a patch(attatched) that fixes the  GadgetHandlerAPI
to return feature params, and fixing BeanConverter to support
MultiMap.
For a feature declaration like this:
<Optional feature="open-search">
     <Param name="search-atom">
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/index.atom?q={searchTerms}</Param>
</Optional>
The meta date request returns this(with our patch)

"features":{"open-search":{"params":{"search-atom":["
http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/index.atom?q=
{searchTerms}"]},"name":"open-search","required":false}

Basically any thing inside the <Param> can be returned as in the meta
data request

So this may be a spec question, but given where the implementation is
today, first wanted to check on shindig dev what the intention of
feature params are.

Conceptually has anyone considered a generic mechanism to allow
features to contribute arbitrary XML, and easily integrate existing
standards? In this example open search description.

<Optional feature="open-search">
     <Param name="description">
         <OpenSearchDescription xmlns="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/
">
            <ShortName>Web Search</ShortName>
            <Description>Use Example.com to search the Web.</Description>
            <Tags>example web</Tags>
            <Contact>[email protected]</Contact>
            <Url type="application/rss+xml"
template="http://example.com/?q={searchTerms}&amp;pw=
{startPage?}&amp;format=rss"/>
          </OpenSearchDescription>
</Param>
</Optional>

We can with our patch, escape the XML of course like this:

<Param name="action3"><![CDATA[<action title="foo"/>]]></Param>

and the XML will be returned as a string in the gadget meta-data
request, but then we have XML on the client/container page to parse.

Has anyone considered leveraging metadata request to transform
arbitrary XML into corresponding JSON?

Was not implementing feature params just a bug or done specifically
for performance reasons?  MetaData request parsing extremely large
feature contributed XML could increase load on the server, but would
be a clean extensible mechanism for features to extend the
specification within the schema and allow the container to access
those extensions as JSON.

Thoughts?

--Andrew Davis

Reply via email to