+1 for option 1. Guillaume makes a good point. Sounds more predictable and easier to work with, since a string is easily placed in pretty much any context compared to JSON, as Vincent also pointed out.
I don`t really mind the extra resolve step in JS. I guess the JSON method could be used when actually returning JSON, like some LiveTable resutls or some other JSON result page. It would be convenient in that place to read the reference directly from its JSON value, though I`m not sure that, in terms of performance, the difference from resolving the string is very big. Plus, there is the difference in mapping the types (string vs int) that Marius mentioned which might need fixing. So overall, I still think option 1 is safer, and option 2 could be nice to have in some cases. Thanks, Eduard On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Caleb James DeLisle <[email protected]> wrote: > Ahh ok, +1 to explosing the absolute cannonical reference, however I will > point out > that use of "this" in javascript is dangerous and should be avoided. It > looks like > you're attaching it to the global namespace (aka window) but "this" has > different > meanings depending on where you are in the code. Better > XWiki.doc.reference or similar IMO. > > Thanks, > Caleb > > > > On 27/08/15 10:23, [email protected] wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> On 26 Aug 2015 at 18:23:42, Caleb James DeLisle ([email protected](mailto: >> [email protected])) wrote: >> >> A bit late to the game but can't we pass a cannonicalized absolute string >>> to the JS ? >>> eg: wiki:space.sp\.ace.sp\\ace.page >>> and then just warn the js devs that they should use functions to >>> manipulate the >>> string representation instead of hacking it manually ? >>> >> >> This is indeed my original proposal in the first mail: >> >> “[…]I’m proposing to change our best practice and instead to pass a full >> reference, as in: >> >> this.sourceReference = >> XWiki.Model.resolve(this.element.down('.metadata .source').innerHTML, >> XWiki.EntityType.DOCUMENT); >> “ >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >> That's what nodejs does for URLs and I will say without reservation that >>> the >>> user-friendlyness of their their URL parsing API is not even compatible >>> to the >>> disaster that was java.net.URL. >>> >>> >>> On 26/08/15 17:36, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau wrote: >>> >>>> I don't really understand the solution 2. >>>> >>>> We already have an EntityReference class in entityReference.js, with a >>>> string serializer and a string parser. >>>> >>>> If we use a JSON format to describe a reference, we will still have to >>>> parse it to create an EntityReference object, and this parser does not >>>> exist yet. >>>> >>>> So what is the benefit? >>>> >>>> I only see drawbacks: >>>> - A JSON reference is a lot more verbose. >>>> - From the java side, we need to serialize the reference to a JSON >>>> representation which is probably more costly than serializing to a >>>> string. >>>> - We use string representations in a lot of places, and suddenly we >>>> should >>>> use JSON but only when we do JavaScript... >>>> >>>> So +1 for the solution 1. >>>> >>>> In any case, it seems a good idea to use references in JS code. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Guillaume >>>> >>>> 2015-08-06 14:25 GMT+02:00 Eduard Moraru : >>>> >>>> I agree with Thomas that it would be best to use EntityReference -> >>>>> JSON as >>>>> much as possible (when passing the reference from velocity to >>>>> javascript, >>>>> server-side), however, man times when you need a reference you also >>>>> end up >>>>> building a new reference (on the client-side, i.e. javascript) so we >>>>> can`t >>>>> really avoid having a strong javascript EntityReference API + >>>>> serializer/resolver. >>>>> >>>>> Also, making a HTTP request from JS to resolve a string reference on >>>>> the >>>>> server (and getting a JSON result) is not really an option IMO >>>>> (specially >>>>> if you do that a lot). >>>>> >>>>> So +1 to using reference in javascript code. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Eduard >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Thomas Mortagne < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Direct EntityReference -> JSON serialisation would provide a strong >>>>>> standard (we already have tool to make sure we never break >>>>>> EntityReference) and it would make JS and Java sides more consistent. >>>>>> Now In some cases we will still need to support parsing a String >>>>>> reference in JS I think. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:38 AM, [email protected] > >>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Marius/all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30 Jul 2015 at 10:26:49, Marius Dumitru Florea ( >>>>>>> >>>>>> [email protected](mailto:[email protected] >>>>>> )) >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another option could be to pass a JSON serialization of the >>>>>>>> reference. >>>>>>>> Thomas has recently fixed some issues that were preventing JSON >>>>>>>> serialization of an entity reference. It should work fine now: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> $jsontool.serialize($documentReference) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> should produce something close to: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>> name: 'Page', >>>>>>>> type: 'DOCUMENT', >>>>>>>> parent: { >>>>>>>> name: 'Space2', >>>>>>>> type: 'SPACE', >>>>>>>> parent: { >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's more verbose obviously. For this we need to modify a bit >>>>>>>> entityReference.js though, because it expects the entity type to be >>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>> int. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Indeed there are only 2 global solutions: >>>>>>> * Solution 1: Pass the seralized String reference and have the js >>>>>>> >>>>>> perform the resolve. This also means that the java code may need to >>>>>> do a >>>>>> serialize. So this has the drawback of doing a serialize + resolve. It >>>>>> >>>>> has >>>>> >>>>>> the advantage of being a one-liner from JS. >>>>>> >>>>>>> * Solution 2: Pass the individual elements of a reference so that the >>>>>>> >>>>>> JS >>>>> >>>>>> doesn’t have to call resolve. This can be done in several ways: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> option 1: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> wiki >> >> >>>>>>> page >> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> space1 >> >> >>>>>>> space2 >> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> option 2: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The JSON you suggest above. However, how would the java code pass >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> >>>>>> into HTML? Inside a tag’s text, as in: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> … json here?... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Inside a >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> >> _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
