Hi Dan, I appreciate the response, and I understand that you're in a tough position.
My biggest concern is that this all feels like Google is just making stuff up as you go along without much clear direction, just sort of watching to see what sticks. It's tough to commit to a platform when the platform provider doesn't appear to be showing strong commitment by way of coherent, easily navigable developer resources and some sort of timeline. I'm certainly willing to deal with delays, but I want to be assured that this is more than a science project. That said, I appreciate your helpful nature, and I remain hopeful. Thanks again, -Mark On Jan 16, 10:20 am, "Dan (Google Employee)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > It's possible that some of the requests were being cached by our > proxy, thus eliminating the call to your server? I'd expect that > authenticated/signed requests wouldn't be cached, but it would be > something to investigate. > > Regarding manual registration, that appears to be a requirement that > we recently lifted. Thanks for pointing it out. > > To address the bad news, many of the problems you've encountered are > due to the fact that iGoogle is in a transition phase. If there were a > single, unified set of docs, most of the confusion about what works > and what doesn't would simply go away. Unfortunately, we're left in a > situation where some developers are writing gadgets to target > production and some are writing gadgets to use new features. I can't > really promise it will get better until gadgets.* launches in > production. > > And, while I'm hopeful to have a timeline for you soon, the one we had > earlier was abandoned, and so there is hesitation to make a new one > public. > > Best, > Dan > > On Jan 15, 4:32 pm, Mark Paine <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dan, > > > The good news: > > It's working now. I dug deep into the gadgets.io.* javascript, figured > > out that there was nothing there to inhibit what I want to do, and > > then just dug deeper into my Apache logs and found that *some* (but > > not all) of the sandbox page reloads were indeed causing makeRequest() > > to hit my server. > > > Now, just so you know for future reference: > > From that URL you pointed me to: > > > > A Note to OAuth Service Providers > > > > If you want to help your development community avoid this manual > > > registration step, you can instead > > > augment your OAuth configuration to accept digital signatures directly > > > from iGoogle. > > > I don't want to have to do this manual registration step, nor does it > > appear that I have to. > > > And now some bad news: > > The whole gadget development experience is, well, utterly awful. The > > documentation is helter-skelter. There are broken links all over your > > site. Some documents suggest a Content type of "html" while others > > recommend "url". GGE is terrible, and shouldn't be allowed to exist on > > a sandbox page if it doesn't support all of the sandbox features. The > > OAuth "tricks" page doesn't really have any tricks at all... it just > > has random musings and notes, but nothing all that valuable. It's > > completely unclear what features are currently supported in the > > sandbox, reducing developers to trial and error. It's also completely > > unclear what kind of ballpark timeline you have for putting sandbox > > features onto iGoogle, if ever. > > > It would be nice to see the root cause of a lot of questions addressed > > with better documentation. I suspect that you would have a lot more > > gadget development activity if the documentation problems were > > addressed. > > > Respectfully, > > -Mark > > > On Jan 15, 2:35 pm, "Dan (Google Employee)" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hi Mark, > > > > Have you read/followed the instructions > > > here:http://code.google.com/apis/gadgets/docs/oauth.html?Ibelieveone of > > > the steps is to register the service provider with Google. It's likely > > > it will not work without that step. > > > > Best, > > > Dan > > > > On Jan 15, 9:39 am, Mark Paine <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > Quick clarification... > > > > > Is 3-legged auth supported in the sandbox for 3rd party providers? > > > > > If so, any ideas why a gadget which loads without error in the > > > > sandbox, with code along these lines would never hit my provider > > > > server with a request? > > > > > <Require feature="opensocial-0.8" /> > > > > <OAuth> > > > > <Service name="myprovider"> > > > > <Access url="https://www.myprovidername.com/oauth/access_token/"; > > > > method="GET" /> > > > > <Request url="https://www.myprovidername.com/oauth/request_token/? > > > > scope=http://www.myprovidername.com/oauth/"; method="GET" /> > > > > <Authorization url="https://www.myprovidername.com/oauth/ > > > > authorize/?oauth_callback=http://oauth.gmodules.com/gadgets/ > > > > oauthcallback" /> > > > > </Service> > > > > </OAuth> > > > > ... > > > > function fetchData() { > > > > var params = {}; > > > > url = "http://www.myprovidername.com/oauth/photo/?alt=json";; > > > > params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.CONTENT_TYPE] = > > > > gadgets.io.ContentType.JSON; > > > > params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.AUTHORIZATION] = > > > > gadgets.io.AuthorizationType.OAUTH; > > > > params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.OAUTH_SERVICE_NAME] = > > > > "myprovider"; > > > > params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.OAUTH_USE_TOKEN] = "always"; > > > > params[gadgets.io.RequestParameters.METHOD] = > > > > gadgets.io.MethodType.GET; > > > > > gadgets.io.makeRequest(url, function (response) { > > > > ... > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Mark > > > > > On Jan 12, 10:43 am, "Dan (Google Employee)" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Guy, > > > > > > The sandbox does support 3-leggedOAuththrough the makeRequest > > > > > function, as outlined > > > > > here:http://code.google.com/apis/gadgets/docs/oauth.html. > > > > > However, 3-leggedOAuthas part of the REST/RPC protocol/client > > > > > libraries is not yet supported on iGoogle. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Dan > > > > > > On Jan 11, 2:37 am, Guy Rutenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > I'm working on an app that requires mapping a user to an iGoogle's > > > > > > owner id (in the sandbox).OAuth's3-legged authentication seems to be > > > > > > the most appropriate way to implement it. > > > > > > > However, as I understand iGoogle doesn't support it yet. Does > > > > > > anybody > > > > > > knows if and when iGoogle will support the 3-legged authentication > > > > > > protocol? > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Guy Rutenberg --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "iGoogle Developer Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Gadgets-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
